NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Camera Talk => Topic started by: Andy on April 25, 2016, 15:57:09
-
Similar to the thread with the D5 (http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,3077.0.html), I'd like to share my experiences with the D500 in a kind of ongoing story.
Got my camera earlier today, chose the Kit - D500 camera with the 16-80mm lens.
Didn't have much time today, took only the test images for Bill Cliff so we are able to see the D500 sensor performance in the context of
http://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm and to get a deeper insight into Dynamic Range, Fixed Pattern Noise and Dark Noise of the D500 sensor.
more info to come.
rgds,
Andy
-
Andy, I am really looking forward to your impressions.
I have followed the link but I couldn't find the D500 listed?
-
Andy, I am really looking forward to your impressions.
I have followed the link but I couldn't find the D500 listed?
Hi Jakov,
I just sent the 170 RAW files to Bill for his analysis.
Hope he has time. As soon he is done, they will appear on the link above.
rgds, Andy
-
Andy, this is exciting! I just got my D500 2 days ago. I'm eager to see your analysis and hear your impressions.
My first impressions of the D500 are very, very favorable, especially w.r.t. the colour. This is not something I typically pay all that much attention to as colour interpretation can be so subjective, but there seem to be some improvements?
I mounted up the 70-200/4 AFS VR on the D500, set everything to "rat-a-tat-tat" mode and aimed at little moving critters like birds & squirrels. Seems to me that the D500 is blazing fast and both the AF and the basic AF-C & d25 tracking are excellent. I speculate that the birders will find the D500 to be the camera of choice for their work. Perhaps the sports photographers also?
[[Yesterday I tried to post some photos of a robin in flight only to realize that they had not been well converted, so I'll need to update the bits and pieces of my software.]]
There are some new D500 settings - new to me anyway - which need investigation. For 3D Tracking there is now a Wide vs. Normal setting and Subject Motion setting for focus tracking with lock-on.
Ergonomically the D500 seems solid, well-built. The right-hand grip is slightly different now with a deeper 'overhang' giving a more secure grip. A couple of other changes also, but I don't want to intrude further on your thread!!
One more note - if anyone is hesitating over the XQD card, then do get it. My XQD is fast, fast, fast and I don't think I even got the fastest one. Also the card is a nice solid thing unlike the little bendy SD cards. Size is in-between CF card and SD card.
-
Nice to see the D500 is on hand by a few fellow NG members , looking forward to more of your comments and images
Regarding the XQD card, how do you transfer the raw files file to the computer ? do you use a card reader plugged to the computer USB ?
-
My particular XQD card - a 32GB Sony G series @ 400 MB/s - was packaged with a USB reader. The adapter is 1.75 x 3" with a card slot in one end and a capped USB connecter in the other. Thus, I am currently limited to a USB 2.0 readout on my old Macbook Pro Retina.
However, the D500 has wireless. So today I'll set that up and give it a try for transferring photos. And the D500 will also connect to smart device. So maybe I'll try that too. Download some Jpgs to my iPad maybe??
-
Nikon Germany seems not to have an awful lot of these. My dealer spoke to them this morning.
I may have mine by the weekend. Doves, Squirrels, parrots are my first planned targets all of them
on an old cemetary round the corner.
XQDs are in the mail.
Until I get a card reader I download from the camera.
For the time being I have to cope with Lightroom for development or is PN ready for D500????
-
Photo Ninja is quite happy to handle the D500 if you have the updates.
-
For the time being I have to cope with Lightroom for development or is PN ready for D500????
I heard from a friend of mine in the US that he prefers NX-D for the D500 at the moment. He thinks the results are better than with other converters.
Hermann
-
Thank you Herrmann and Andrea. I will try both. Update PN and try NX-D to compare
-
As "promised", a "real time" experience sharing.
I had the camera today with me during a trip, together with the 16-80mm 2.8-4 lens. This combo is definitely lighter than the D5+24-120mm (1320gr vs. 2115gr). In other words, the D500 incl the lens is lighter than the D5 body alone. Or the FX Combo is 60% heavier. Whatever you prefer.
The shutter sounds softer, kind of what I heard with the D810. Nice frequency.
The D500 has a flicker supression feature. Cool. Can be seen in the viewfinder when active (lower right corner). Seems to be a capability in the exposure meter (the sensor does not get light in viewfinder mode)
The D500 and the 128GB 2933x XQD cards work well - no issues detected (unlike with some SDXC cards - according to some Posts @dpreview). The camera and the XQD cards are super fast. Haven't checked if the D500 has the same speed as the D5. Will be intersting to see the battery life of the D500. Won't be as high as with the D5, where 4-5000 photos per charge is rather normal.
The viewfinder: Joy. The size is really great for a DX camera. Very close to the FX experience. One of the highlights of this camera.
Unfortunately the diopter in the viewfinder can only compensate for -2EV . Don't know why the D500 can't get to the usual -3EV most other Nikon bodies can.
A few images while on the go in the airports (all NEF versions of the images can be accessed <here> (https://onedrive.live.com/?id=C59FEF9F04ED4A3A%211832&cid=C59FEF9F04ED4A3A). Just use the filenumber as an index)
1) ISO 3200
2) ISO 6400
3) ISO 1000
4) ISO 1600
-
1) ISO 3200
2) ISO 3200
3) ISO 3200
4) ISO 3200 as captured
5) Picture (4) -2EV, plus ADL
-
1) ISO 1600
2) ISO 3200
3) ISO 6400
-
Thanks Andy et al for the early images! Nice to hear all the positive reactions;)
-
Using the D500 + 70-200/4G AFS VR, I stress tested the XQD card and the battery this afternoon by shooting 731 NEFs (19.8GB) of hopping squirrels with a few birds thrown in for good measure. As well as some tests in which I initially focused on some trees probably 50 feet behind my yard fence and then slowly panned into the yard (across the fence) and through the various plants in the garden until I finished with focus on the bricks about 4 feet away.
I worked mostly using AF-C with d25, d72 or the amazing d153 together with various combinations of a3 lock-on. I also tried the AF-C + Auto combo (which would work much better on a subject moving against a plain background). I flipped back and forth with focusing: sometimes using the shutter and sometimes using AF-ON.
Summary: the D500 is an excellent tracker. As is always wise to remember, the D500 can't track "on its own". You have to really work and practice with these settings and know which one is appropriate for which moving subject. Well, **I** have to practice this stuff, YMMV. ;D But it is fun, and the D500 makes it easier than it used to be.
The first 5 in a sequence of 15.
f/5 for 1/1000" with auto-ISO varying from 2000 to 3200.
Only one in the sequence was slightly oof.
Cropped and resized for posting, no edits.
The crop area (prior to resize) was 8% of the area of the original photo.
[[I am really tired of squirrels.]]
-
Thanks to Andy, Bill Claff has already prepared the results with respect to Photographic Dynamic Range:
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D500,Nikon%20D7200 (http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D500,Nikon%20D7200)
Edit: Also reported here now: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57666850 (http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57666850)
From another thread there it appears that others contributed data too, so there should be high confidence in the results because of the consistency found.
It is worth keeping in mind that Photographic Dynamic Range is standardized to a certain print size and viewing distance and is not the results one will see if viewing the image at 100%, where reproduction size will differ between sensors.
Compared to D7200:
-
Thanks Oivind,
here is more description to his analysis:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3996382
Past ISO 400 the D500 sensor can be treated like an ISO invarant sensor.
rgds, Andy
-
Looks like I edited at the same time you posted. It is worth reading Bill's comments.
Fixed pattern noise analysis here:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57667055 (http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57667055)
"The D500 appears to have very little FPN."
-
Thanks to Andy here and also over to Bill Claff for this PDR analysis.
-
Thank you all.
-
I used Bill Claff's site to compare the DX-performance of some cameras. Here the D600 (DX), the D500 (which is DX), the D810 (DX) and the D5 (DX):
http://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D5(DX),Nikon%20D500,Nikon%20D600,Nikon%20D600(DX),Nikon%20D810(DX)
To compare the lesser performance of all these @DX I threw in Nikons reference in the FX domain, the D600 (FX)
Conclusio: @DX the D810 is the worst of all, except for lowest ISO80 and less, starting @ISO 2546 the D5 beats them all. From ISO400 to ISO1234, the D500 is the best current DX performer, at ISO2546 D5 & D500 are eaqual.
When you look at the FX-reference you see that the total Pixel budget influences test results in this test very much.
Andreas, can you explain that?
-
When you look at the FX-reference you see that the total Pixel budget influences test results in this test very much.
The area of the sensor is the number one factor determining dynamic range (as defined and measured here anyway).
Interestingly, the state-of-the-art FX sensor (D600) is still about one stop below the ideal FX sensor, so it is about where the ideal DX sensor is.
Edit: just to add, this means that no DX camera should ever be able to beat the D600 with regards to dynamic range. That's how far we've come, wow.
-
Thank you, Simone.
Used D600 go for 800 to 900 Euros, new D600 are 1.100 Euros.
Why do I buy a D500 anyway (at double the price)?
Because the D600 AF sucks
and I want a cam that can record fast action
and I want the eye detection AF that works in low light (with the D600 I get more keepers in MF!!!)
-
The ISO performance differences are quite small for all these cameras and is not really noticeable in 'every day' shooting even for a pro.
The differences come only when you start pushing them in the extreme then you start to see AF performance, tracking, low light, frames per second etc.
Also build quality and how efficient is the weather sealing then also size and weight,,,
-
Thank you, Simone.
Used D600 go for 800 to 900 Euros, new D600 are 1.100 Euros.
Why do I buy a D500 anyway (at double the price)?
Because the D600 AF sucks
and I want a cam that can record fast action
and I want the eye detection AF that works in low light (with the D600 I get more keepers in MF!!!)
In terms of AF coverage and speed, the D500 should be a winner.
The D600's AF tracks decently, but the coverage is really small. If you want to fill your frame it gets tricky to keep the focus on the correct part of the image. Stil, if you get more keepers with MF on moving subjects then you are quite skilled with MF.
-
I would be really interested in seeing two shots taken at ISO 12.800 by the D500 and Df or D4.
These charts are nice, but I prefer seeing images and the amount of noise at these high ISO settings.
-
Hi Jakov,
DF or D4 will be better if you compare the Raw-files. JPEG there will be not as much difference regarding the newer processor.
Harald
-
Sorry but when do you need ISO 12.000? ;D
-
I would be really interested in seeing two shots taken at ISO 12.800 by the D500 and Df or D4.
These charts are nice, but I prefer seeing images and the amount of noise at these high ISO settings.
Unfortunately, they don't have the D500 test shots yet, but you can take the D7200 as a proxy for the time being.
The D500 will likely be a bit better than that, but you should not expect it to be one stop better since the D7200 is already so good (compared to an ideal sensor).
http://goo.gl/jrNIrH (http://goo.gl/jrNIrH)
-
Simone, thanks for this chart, I guess I'll buy the D750 then :D
Similar thoughts that Frank has with a D600, you can get a D750 for half the price of a D500...
-
Simone, thanks for this chart, I guess I'll buy the D750 then :D
Similar thoughts that Frank has with a D600, you can get a D750 for half the price of a D500...
The D750 is quite nice, pretty clean at high ISOs with high resolution, and a wider AF coverage than the D600. But of course not as wide as D500, and speed and buffer capacity are also not in the same league. Horses for courses.
-
The D750 is quite nice, pretty clean at high ISOs with high resolution, and a wider AF coverage than the D600. But of course not as wide as D500, and speed and buffer capacity are also not in the same league. Horses for courses.
The D500 for me is "my first tele" machine. I want to learn to take fast action with fast AF. I want to learn to track. I want to learn to see and compose sports and wildlife shots. I will start that endeavour in Scotland. Just for the fun of it. I do not plan to use that knowledge for work ... but I may ... someday.
What I really want is a D850, so a camera that shall deliver clean high res for tripod work and clean high ISO (I hope for the Sony A7R2 chip in there) and superb AF with a coverage comparable to the D5 with XQD & big buffer and ruggetized body.
The D600 will stay my MF machine as it is now. I love the tonal response too. Great digital back for my Sinar too. The D600 will stay man panorama machine because I have a custom built head from 360precision for the D600 + 1.4/24G, delivering 800 Megapixels in 30° x 180°.
Only question is what I will do with the D3. She is still by far the best machine for quick & dirty portrait jobs and the best in the discipline of ergonomics. Hmm. Just keep her for such jobs.
-
Unfortunately, they don't have the D500 test shots yet, but you can take the D7200 as a proxy for the time being.
The D500 will likely be a bit better than that, but you should not expect it to be one stop better since the D7200 is already so good (compared to an ideal sensor).
http://goo.gl/jrNIrH (http://goo.gl/jrNIrH)
Thank you for sharing:
This charts compares full sensor sizes and it compares the sensors from different perspectives, esp. distances here, meaning the geometry is slightly different and lens performance possibly too.
I am really surprised how small the visual difference is between a D5@FX/12.800 and a D7200@DX/12.800
A fair comparsion would be more like D5@DX and D7200@DX though. Then the difference would be even smaller.
-
Thank you for sharing:
This charts compares full sensor sizes and it compares the sensors from different perspectives, esp. distances here, meaning the geometry is slightly different and lens performance possibly too.
I am really surprised how small the visual difference is between a D5@FX/12.800 and a D7200@DX/12.800
A fair comparsion would be more like D5@DX and D7200@DX though. Then the difference would be even smaller.
The lens on the DX sensor is different from the lens on the FX sensor, see the "i" icon for information.
The distances should be roughly the same. There are some minor differences in on-screen magnification, I don't know why exactly.
I think that a comparison should be done at the same output size. However, I think the differences in output size in those images are small and almost negligible.
I don't know what you could learn from a comparison of the D5@DX vs the D7200. The difference will be small as you say. Since you are equalizing the sensor area the only difference would be the number of pixels covering a given portion of the scene.
As for the actual comparison of the D5 vs. D7200: Whether that difference is small depends on your definition of 'small'. It is roughly 1 stop, crank the D5 to ISO 25600 and the noise looks almost identical to the D7200's noise at ISO 12800 (maybe still slightly better). I would not say a 1 stop difference is necessarily "small". It is almost as small as it will get, we used to have more like 2 stop difference between FX and DX at high ISOs a few generations ago.
-
You double the magnification with the DX chip if you look at both pictures at the same output size.
You would need four times the pixels to compensate for that and these pixels should collect the same
amount of photons per unit area which becomes more or less the case with with wiring banned into the lower parts
of the recording chip. .... a7r2 ...
DX to DX the difference is very small but the comparsion is apples to apples.
-
You double the magnification with the DX chip if you look at both pictures at the same output size.
This is another way to put it. But the factor is more like 1.5.
-
All the recent Nikon sensors (made by whomever) are excellent and Good Enough. Sure there are some minor differences, but how relevant is it to most photographers whether their ISO maximum is 1640000 versus 102400?? Or whether dynamic range has improved by half a stop? Those things are nice but do not make for any kind of upgrade necessity.
I think it is the D500 features which are a huge improvement over D750 or D7200 and will be the reason for many photographers to upgrade. Here are a few - mostly speed & AF based because that was why I got the D500.
- 10 frames per second
- XQD card for speed
- buffering of 200 lossless compressed 14-bit raws (79 if uncompressed)
- new AF engine "multi-CAM 20K AF"
- fast live view AF
- 99 cross-type AF points
- 153 AF points stretching from right to left. (Amazing performance with this. Do focus-and-recompose with this.)
- auto auto-focus fine tuning
- new metering engine "180K RGB"
- new image engine EXPEED 5 (really really nice color)
- electronic 1st curtain
- button illumination
- (a huge amount of cool video stuff which I know nothing about)
-
We need to start writing ISO numbers with the zeroes in groups of three like this:
ISO 1,640,000
and
ISO 102,400
They've become that big! :o :)
Andrea B. wrote:
"All the recent Nikon sensors (made by whomever) are excellent and Good Enough. Sure there are some minor differences, but how relevant is it to most photographers whether their ISO maximum is 1640000 versus 102400?? Or whether dynamic range has improved by half a stop? Those things are nice but do not make for any kind of upgrade necessity."
-
All the recent Nikon sensors (made by whomever) are excellent and Good Enough. Sure there are some minor differences, but how relevant is it to most photographers whether their ISO maximum is 1640000 versus 102400?? Or whether dynamic range has improved by half a stop? Those things are nice but do not make for any kind of upgrade necessity.
I think it is the D500 features which are a huge improvement over D750 or D7200 and will be the reason for many photographers to upgrade. Here are a few - mostly speed & AF based because that was why I got the D500.
- 10 frames per second
- XQD card for speed
- buffering of 200 lossless compressed 14-bit raws (79 if uncompressed)
- new AF engine "multi-CAM 20K AF"
- fast live view AF
- 99 cross-type AF points
- 153 AF points stretching from right to left. (Amazing performance with this. Do focus-and-recompose with this.)
- auto auto-focus fine tuning
- new metering engine "180K RGB"
- new image engine EXPEED 5 (really really nice color)
- electronic 1st curtain
- button illumination
- (a huge amount of cool video stuff which I know nothing about)
I think it is an interesting phenomenon that people start looking for improvements in areas which have seen an improvement in the past. As the limits of what can be achieved are reached, people are facing an unexpected outcome in that the improvements are getting smaller. Sensor resolutions are still increasing (although we have seen a segmentation here and arguably the advantages of higher-res sensors are only noticable with top-notch large and heavy glass), but with dynamic range the physical limits will soon be reached and manufacturers will be looking for different improvements to stay competitive. As you are saying, we should be looking at the new features of the D500 instead of sensor performance. As I said earlier, sensor performance will not be hugely different from previous cameras because those were already close to what is physically achievable.
I just wanted to clarify this point because I saw some people who expected the D500 to beat the sensor performance of current FX cameras, or indeed have multiple stops better noise performance than the last DX cams etc. Those expectations are now becoming completely unrealistic, we won't ever see them fulfilled (it would be cool to have sensors that do not clip, but these will require longer exposures to provide any advantage).
-
DPReview did some tests with the D500 and found the DR class leading:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/4939144988/nikon-d500-studio-and-dynamic-range-tests-published
-
I agree Simone ,,, :)
-
I didn't know whether I should write 1,640,000 or 1.640.000.
So I just wrote 1640000. ::)
-
Try 1640K :)
As for sensor performance, I'm don't know how efficient modern sensors are at converting photons into an image signal, but I believe it's in the region of 50% or so. Improving that to 100% gains only one stop ... any improvements in this area will be small, perhaps more will be gained from dynamic range as the signal:noise ratio improves etc
-
DPReview did some tests with the D500 and found the DR class leading:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/4939144988/nikon-d500-studio-and-dynamic-range-tests-published
Great, now the comparison I posted earlier can be run with the D500. It looks almost identical, as expected. I get dizzy looking at too many noise patterns :D
-
As for sensor performance, I'm don't know how efficient modern sensors are at converting photons into an image signal, but I believe it's in the region of 50% or so. Improving that to 100% gains only one stop ... any improvements in this area will be small, perhaps more will be gained from dynamic range as the signal:noise ratio improves etc
Roland,
you are correct with your 1 stop improvement, but ...
... the CFA takes about 2 stops away.
Replacing the CFA with a non-filtering approach (like with a prisma) provides additional potential headroom in the future.
rgds, Andy
-
You are right of course Andy, perhaps I should have written: any improvements in this area will be small using current technologies ...
-
I was lucky enough to get my hands on the D500 for a few hours.
As any respectable nerd does I went straight to comparing it to my D5300 and Df. All cameras set to same WB, no NR during PP, etc. The D500 is sparingly good at ISO 6400.
The viewfinder is big (almost feels FX), the shutter sound is very behaved, the responsiveness and not to forget, the AF is an absolutely killer! I will need this camera later this year.
LV rendering on the rear screen in dim/poor light is very (Canon) good. It is better than the Df's and buckets better than the D5300's.
Auto AF Finetune is a really cool and swift feature (although care must be taken when performing the task). I can see this as a very helpful way to get lenses tuned when I shoot stage performances under difficult lighting.
For you Øivind, I've also included a shot showing the focusing screen (via the mirror).
-
Try 1640K :)
As for sensor performance, I'm don't know how efficient modern sensors are at converting photons into an image signal, but I believe it's in the region of 50% or so. Improving that to 100% gains only one stop ... any improvements in this area will be small, perhaps more will be gained from dynamic range as the signal:noise ratio improves etc
The quantum efficiency off almost all current cameras is around 50%. See http://www.sensorgen.info (http://www.sensorgen.info)
Increasing this to 100% would lead to a 1stop increase, but since the dynamic range (using the SNR=1 definition, which is different from the one Bill Claff is using) is so close to 14 stops, one would need to increase the encoding to 16bit in order to see the full extent of the dynamic range increase.
I don't understand how the CFA could make up a 2 stop loss, wouldn't that show up in the QE?
-
Agree Roland.
Left Brussels airport earlier tonight. Sorry, didn't have any time to record more interesting images. Just a few, rushing to the gate.
(all NEF versions of the images can be accessed <here> (https://onedrive.live.com/?id=C59FEF9F04ED4A3A%211832&cid=C59FEF9F04ED4A3A). Just use the filenumber as an index)
1) ISO 1400 (you might be interested to play around with pushing the shadows)
2) ISO 8000
3) ISO 3600, had to correct for -1.3EV to avoid blown highlights. (He might have missed his flight :))
4) ISO 8000 and tele (yesterday, we had ISO 3200 and ww)
5) ISO 7200 and tele (yesterday, we had ISO 3200 and ww)
rgds, Andy
-
Here are the D500 and Df LV screens seen via my iPhone 6s.
-
and finally before I bed, a 5 stop push of an ISO 100 image.
-
Sten, I figure D5300 is doing a great job! :o ;D :o ;D
-
I don't understand how the CFA could make up a 2 stop loss, wouldn't that show up in the QE?
QE (Quantum Efficiency) is measured after all filtration. It simply measures how well the photosite (after filtration) converts the photons that reach it into an imaging signal.
The CFA (colour filter array - usually Bayer RGBG) by definition must filter out a lot of light, at least one stop and probably closer to two. For example the red filter removes most green and all blue, so that's less light reaching the photosite.
Black and white sensors don't have the CFA so are usually a stop more sensitive.
Colour aware photosites would not need a CFA so sensitivity in theory could also be improved. Consider a stacked colour sensor - the top layer reads the red part or the spectrum, the rest passes through, the green layer reads the green spectrum, and the remaining blue passes to the blue layer. The Foveon sensor used by Sigma works on this principle. However these are complicated to make, and efficiency so far is not very good...
-
...
For you Øivind, I've also included a shot showing the focusing screen (via the mirror).
Thanks so much for remembering and posting Sten, it looks very much like they used the same catch and focusing screen as D7100/7200.
I received my Katzeye all matte (non-Optibright) screen for the D7100 before last weekend, and it is generally 1 stop brighter than the Canon S-Screen, at f/4 perhaps 1.3 stops, and overall with a hair more depth of field showing (insignificant) and better contrast. The rub here is that I managed to scratch it in the upper corner when installing, it sort of got stuck when initially got it in the wrong way in, and I must have grabbed to far in (due to to poor light as I had forgot to put on my headlamp, and then it was too late to go and get it), or it otherwise touched something. I suspect that once a week or two has gone by it will be mostly forgotten though as I sort of have to look for it.
-
This is another way to put it. But the factor is more like 1.5.
23,5 mm x 15,6 mm = 366,6 qmm
36,0 mm x 23,9 mm = 860,4 qmm
860,4 / 366,6 ~ 2,35
-
I think it is the D500 features which are a huge improvement over D750 or D7200 and will be the reason for many photographers to upgrade. Here are a few - mostly speed & AF based because that was why I got the D500.
- 10 frames per second
- XQD card for speed
- buffering of 200 lossless compressed 14-bit raws (79 if uncompressed)
- new AF engine "multi-CAM 20K AF"
- fast live view AF
- 99 cross-type AF points
- 153 AF points stretching from right to left. (Amazing performance with this. Do focus-and-recompose with this.)
- auto auto-focus fine tuning
- new metering engine "180K RGB"
- new image engine EXPEED 5 (really really nice color)
- electronic 1st curtain
- button illumination
- (a huge amount of cool video stuff which I know nothing about)
You are absolutely right. IQ is as good as it gets with all of those Cams or as Simone put it: Very near to the theoretical limit (with current technology).
Reliable AF with good coverage and consitant colors even in mixed lighting, these are things that really lacked in the past.
If all these reports are true, the fifth generation is a real winner in these respects.
PS: "they are waitung for my cam..."
-
Replacing the CFA with a non-filtering approach (like with a prisma) provides additional potential headroom in the future.
The Kodak Patent for rate counting /overflow counting instead of bucket counting can improve DR to anything. Remember (German): http://www.nikon-fotografie.de/vbulletin/off-topic/45885-beliebig-hohe-dynamik-am-chip.html
And here is the "missing link": http://www.google.ch/patents/US6069377
-
I didn't know whether I should write 1,640,000 or 1.640.000.
So I just wrote 1640000. ::)
Sure would be nice it the industry would revert back to DIN in place of ISO. Then you could just write it as 63°.
-
Or 1'640'000, the way I usually spell "big numbers" 😊 And I'm also in favor to revert to DIN numbers.
-
23,5 mm x 15,6 mm = 366,6 qmm
36,0 mm x 23,9 mm = 860,4 qmm
860,4 / 366,6 ~ 2,35
I understand, but magnification is a linear measure, so the additional magnification needed to bring the DX image to the same output size as the FX image is 1.5 times higher.
-
I understand, but magnification is a linear measure, so the additional magnification needed to bring the DX image to the same output size as the FX image is 1.5 times higher.
I see.
The FX Sensor hat 2.35 times the area for collecting photons. Gathering twice as many photons (if collection per area is the same) means FX is always one stop in advance, right?
-
QE (Quantum Efficiency) is measured after all filtration. It simply measures how well the photosite (after filtration) converts the photons that reach it into an imaging signal.
The CFA (colour filter array - usually Bayer RGBG) by definition must filter out a lot of light, at least one stop and probably closer to two. For example the red filter removes most green and all blue, so that's less light reaching the photosite.
Black and white sensors don't have the CFA so are usually a stop more sensitive.
Thanks. However, it is difficult to reconcile this with the description of how sensorgen QE figures are calculated. That description is a bit on the short side however.
-
I see.
The FX Sensor hat 2.35 times the area for collecting photons. Gathering twice as many photons (if collection per area is the same) means FX is always one stop in advance, right?
This is a contentious statement :D.
It always depends on the context, i.e. what you wish to equalize between the two captures.
-
I always thought aperture and shutter speed controlled "gathered" light, not sensor size.
-
They do, don't worry.
It would maybe be wise to discuss these issues in a separate thread if anyone wishes to discuss them at all. Otherwise the connection to the D500 may be lost.
-
Simone: I am still waiting for my D500 .... conection not even made yet ;-)
-
Simone: I am still waiting for my D500 .... conection not even made yet ;-)
Anticipation is better than instant gratification :D
-
Seems I will not receive my D500 before Scotland. NPS called, my dealer spoke to Nikon. Have to check Calumet in Edinburgh, if they can sell me one...
-
I won't get my D500 either, as I'm leaving Norway on the 1st. Will get later in the month.
Obviously Nikon gave priority to the US market this time.
-
Just picked up mine today. ;D
I wanted to wait for a pick up in the summer but my dealer had one on the shelf and send me an email if I'm interested.
When I wanted to pick it up this morning it seemed they made a mistake and it was a pre-ordered one. Luckily the owner (I know him for years) was in and he gave it to me.
Bad thing is somebody has to wait (a little?) longer for his/her D500. They have a huge back-log.
So yes, I have the D500 with me in Scotland.
A quick garden shot with the 300PF. No AF fine-tuning yet, I'm still configuring.
-
Chris, you lucky guy :)
Enjoy the new gadget!
-
Congrats, Chris. You look as happy as a box of birds!
-
A few early impressions. Still haven't had time to shoot more, but a bit was possible.
1) The viewfinder
Looks like to be one of the highlights of the camera. If compared with the D7200 and D800, the impression is that it is about the same size as the D800 viewfinder. In addition, that the clarity and contrast of the D500 VF seems to be better than the one in the D800. I like it, as the viewfinder is one of the critical components of a camera for me - as I need it most of the time.
2) The handlebar
I like the deep recessed form of the handle - similar to the D750 (and better than the one on the D800). The probability that the camera slips out from my fingers when carrying only with finger tips seems to be very low.
3) AF coverage is really large
4) Weight
I mentioned it before, but this impression comes back and back. The camera is light. Add to it the smaller DX Telelens options and the advantage grows vs. FX bodies
5) Speed
In most aspects, the D500 is as fast as the D4, sometimes faster (AF, XQD, ..). I am using the second 2933x 128GB XQD card in this camera and the D500 behaves like the D5. Whatever I shot, the writing was done when I released the shutter. Which means: I don't need to spend ANY attention to the buffer capacity. This wasn't the case with the D800, D750 and D7200 (for my style of shooting). Not that I always need this buffe capacity, but when needed - it simplifies things.
6) ISO Sensitivity
I might get old, but I don't see it particularily insightful when there are long discussions about high ISO performance of contempoarary sensors. Most sensors are so close to each other that the subtleties don't matter in most cases any more. Ranges up to ISO 3200 on DX are well usable in most circumstances and if needed all cameras can be used like in the "good old" days when there wasn't an ISO dial on the camera body.
7) Flicker reduction
Hey, I like it. If I am not wrong, the first Nikon DSLR with this feature. Not the most important one, but one more feature to avoid pressing the butter at the wrong time when lights were flickering with 50 or 60 Hz.
8.) EFCS
Like the D5, the D500 has the slightly improved EFCS (Electronic front curtain shutter) of the D810. One more thing to reduce shake and vibrations on the tripod (just use it with 3s shutter delay).
9) Size
The combo D500 & AFS 300mm/4 PF is a size/performance winner. The camera and lens look so small, yet the performance is good - very good actually. Just give it a try.
rgds,
Andy
-
Long distance shots with the D500 and the AFS 300mm/4 PF. All handheld (I was in a rush).
The camera reports 450mm in the EXIF data.
Total weight of the combo: 1615 gr (D5, body only: 1405 gr)
1) The scene. 16mm DX (24mm)
2) Full frame with the AFS 300mm PF. Distance approx 500 meter, 1500 ft
3) 100% crop of original image
4) Full frame with AFS 300mm/4 PF. Distance approx 1km, 3000ft
5) 100% crop of original image
RAWs are <here> (https://onedrive.live.com/?id=C59FEF9F04ED4A3A%211875&cid=C59FEF9F04ED4A3A). Just use the filenumber as index
-
I see.
The FX Sensor hat 2.35 times the area for collecting photons. Gathering twice as many photons (if collection per area is the same) means FX is always one stop in advance, right?
No it does not. You have a 2.35X bigger area to take into account as well.
This error in various disguises crops up over and over again on the 'net and people now start to believe this is a fact, not a myth. Photographers understood this basic fact in the old days when we used hand-held meters and formats ranging from the smallest to the biggest sheet film, so it is not that hard to learn.
Give this a second thought: why does light metering work at all? It is because the exposure is independent of format. That is also why we use relative not absolute apertures. f/2.8 lets through the same light intensity no matter what the focal length is.
-
A few more with this lens (all images just resized)
1) Approx 40 meter (120 ft)
2) Approx 150 meter (450 ft)
3) approx 5 meter (15 ft)
4) approx 100 meter (300ft)
-
The D500 was in the Greek market today. It is listed for 2,139.00 Euro. My dealer sold me one for 1,970.00 (including VAT).
It seems that there is price variation in Europe. I bought the camera for birds. I got home late afternoon, put a battery from D810
in D500, minimum set up and out a bit before sunset. Used the 300mm PF with TC-1.7X. I shot in jpeg, as my sw needs upgrade.
-
As this D500/300mm combo is such a small one, it doesn't scare people away. Seems to be well suited for portraits from a "safe distance".
Combined with the fast D500, some unexpected encounters can happen - like here
This tourist seemingly tried to position herself for a perfect selfie in the palace park of Schoenbrunn
She came up to the terrace I was taking my long distance shots from. An unexpected highspeed shooting emerged.
85 shots in 60 seconds. oops. Glad that the buffer capacity of the D500 wasn't in my way :-)
Here are 4 examples from the short "encounter".
-
Bjørn, I'm sure Frank understands the physics.
The statement he made is either right or wrong depending on the context or underlying assumptions in which it is embedded. That's why I called it contentious. Your point is correct, but doesn't address the implied point of Frank's question. We need to be very precise with these statements, but I wouldn't want this thread to be filled with those discussions since a lot of people find them boring/without merit and want to read about the D500 instead (that's my assumption). I would propose that Frank or anyone interested to discuss these matters opens a separate thread.
-
In the digital era, more emphasis is on numbers than ever before. People think they understand numbers because something can be counted. Relationships and relative concepts require understanding not counting. Thus harder to grasp. We observe this from misleading conclusions posted all over the 'net.
The D500 vs D5 sparks such discussions because although facts are easily available, disentangling their significance might be more of a challenge.
I'm packing for Hebrides/Scotland with just 2 days to go and a lot of overweight to handle, so other members have to initiate a new discussion. Later, admins can move over the relevant posts there. Or keep it as it is relevant to the D500/D5 divide.
-
In the digital era, more emphasis is on numbers than ever before. People think they understand numbers because something can be counted. Relationships and relative concepts require understanding not counting. Thus harder to grasp. We observe this from misleading conclusions posted all over the 'net.
The D500 vs D5 sparks such discussions because although facts are easily available, disentangling their significance might be more of a challenge.
I'm packing for Hebrides/Scotland with just 2 days to go and a lot of overweight to handle, so other members have to initiate a new discussion. Later, admins can move over the relevant posts there. Or keep it as it is relevant to the D500/D5 divide.
Thanks!
I can't speak for others, but from my training as a physicist, understanding involves both qualitative and quantitative levels.
I wish you a safe trip and see you in Killin!
-
JA gave men an address with stock in Amsterdam. I just reserved it till my bank transfes enough funds to my credit card. Otherwise I would have to drive to A'dam with cash to pick it up.
-
Andy. "Acquaintance made over a distance." She seemes to have a lot of fun in this shooting. Mr. Charming!
-
JA gave men an address with stock in Amsterdam. I just reserved it till my bank transfes enough funds to my credit card. Otherwise I would have to drive to A'dam with cash to pick it up.
I'm afraid it's already gone. It's the same dealer as where I got mine and they corrected their mistake; no availability
-
I'm afraid it's already gone. It's the same dealer as where I got mine and they corrected their mistake; no availability
1) I just talked to Tim Potharst and he still got one.
2) Because my local brick & mortar just called and guarantees that I will have my D500 + AF-S 200-500/5.6G on Tuesday latest, very possibly on Monday, I canceled my order with FOTO BOOMS a minute ago.
-
I'm afraid it's already gone. It's the same dealer as where I got mine and they corrected their mistake; no availability
There are more camera shops in Amsterdam than Nivo ;)
For those whom need it now:
http://www.fotobooms.nl/detail/0/505/511/0/24055/nikon-d500-body.html
-
I got mine today and used her intensly for 90 Minutes and a few hundred shots
To make a long story short:
She delivers to what the D3 once promised when I bought her back
in 2008. The D500 is blazingly fast. AF and tracking work even with
the slow 1.4/24mm. She drives it like hell.
IQ is "countable hair" when it comes to details. Shutter is well damped
quieter than other cams eben without quiet mode!
Wow. Wow. Wow and Wow. This is my first impression.
Lots to do pics and more later
-
I got mine today and used her intensly for 90 Minutes and a few hundred shots
To make a long story short:
She delivers to what the D3 once promised when I bought her back
in 2008. The D500 is blazingly fast. AF and tracking work even with
the slow 1.4/24mm. She drives it like hell.
IQ is "countable hair" when it comes to details. Shutter is well damped
quieter than other cams eben without quiet mode!
Wow. Wow. Wow and Wow. This is my first impression.
Lots to do pics and more later
Wow, great! Have fun and do bring it to Scotland!
-
Wow, great! Have fun and do bring it to Scotland!
yes. The 200-500 is said to arrive on Tuesday. No announcement for the Battery grip yet...
-
Enjoy your D500, Frank.
I am sure you will like it :D
Needless to say that pictures are always welcomed ....
rgds, Andy
-
I am just struggeling with the USB3-transfer. Need to get a Card reader for the XQD fast.
This is not even USB2 Speed! My Samsung SD-Card read much faster...
***
Good news is that the stopped charging 129€ for every year over at picture code. The one-year-renewal license was only 59€. A fair deal.
-
http://www.ebay.de/itm/like/291666634118?clk_rvr_id=1023005753950&item=291666634118&lgeo=1&vectorid=229487&rmvSB=true
-
the color rendition is superb and the AF capability exceeds my AF technique by far. Yet what I see motivates me a lot!
Tomorrow I will take this cam on full Auto AF to a JOB!
Ergonomics are very much D810 like.
A dependable tool for a low price.
-
and a crop:
-
another one of a "seize the moment"-shot
and more ... color rendition ... very difficult to reach the JPEG quality with a RAW conversion ... lots of potential for better RAW converters here.
-
I can't imagine what kind of activity you have shot in the first picture. Not very common on my latitudes. They seem to be combining two totally incompatible things ;) The pictures are great though. I considered buying one last friday, but reason suddenly struck down on me rather unexpectedly. I`m actually quite pleased with my current gear, so I guess there must be something wrong. Maybe I need to get my head examined :o I dont understand why Bjørn haven't received his yet, because my local pusher had two of them and already sold nine. Congratulation with your new camera Frank!
-
The camera was originally thought as a recreational tool.
Now it seems to be a real workhorse the usability of which extends far beyond birding.
The girls jump on gummi balls. I wanted to capture the moment in which both of them are in the air
and manage to synchronize their dancing ropes. Difficult normally but not with a burst from the D500.
she afs and releases in next to no time.
RAW conversion is still an issue. I will need a while to get better results.
-
Doesnt Nikon's own software support the NEF files? It always seem to give the best results.
-
Capture NX-D is not my cup of tea. Inflexible. Underfeatured.
I loved NX-2 but it is gone together with its programmers.
Photo Ninja 1.3.3c is very usable already.
I have yet to create my own profiles.
The ooc JPEGs are very good though.
-
Capture NX-D is not my cup of tea. Inflexible. Underfeatured.
I loved NX-2 but it is gone together with its programmers.
Frank,
I used NX-2 as the only tool for post processing for years. Loved it like you.
Until Jan 2016 - as I had only "old" cameras which were supported by NX-2.
With recent camera acquistions this year, there was the need to move forward, not backward.
After much "resistance", I gave NX-D a try - and to much my surprise, I could do all the things with NX-D I did with NX-2.
Of course the menu structure was different, but after one evening, familiarity is now here as well.
A few things are even easier and more obvious than with NX-2 - so the pain is not really there.
Nice that Nikon didn't forget to support all the older D-SLRs in NX-D, so there is no need to use NX-2 for the older cameras.
You can of course use all the other RAW converters you like, but if you don't want to do all the profiling and second-guessing where a certain artefact is coming from, you might keep NX-D as your second RAW converter. At least you can be re-assured that the camera and (Nikkor) lens data are properly known to the software on your PC and you can re-run some of the in-camera processing steps on your PC again.
Going forward, my guess is that camera manufacturers like Nikon will put much more emphasis on the SW parts of the image processing pipeline in all 3 stages, so things will get more connected (and dependent). The days of product improvements alone on HW innovations might come to an end.
The 3 SW "buckets" I was thinking of:
1) SW processes and refinements before the "RAW file" storage step
2) in-camera processing like JPEG files and other capabilities (after the RAW step)
3) Post-camera processing on the PC (i.e. de-noising and demosaicing with FP numbers instead of integers the camera has to use for power consumption considerations)
rgds,
Andy
-
Capture NX-D is not my cup of tea. Inflexible. Underfeatured.
I loved NX-2 but it is gone together with its programmers.
Photo Ninja 1.3.3c is very usable already.
I have yet to create my own profiles.
The ooc JPEGs are very good though.
I've seen many complaints and quite frankly, some scary examples of developed d500 RAW files, that obviously comes from non generic raw developers. NX-D will create tiff files of the same quality you see from the ooc jpegs, that you can transfere to a sw with more creative options. A solution worth considering IMO.
-
Got my copy on thursday. Lightroom needs a patch to V6.5 to be able to read D500s NEFs. Appears to be buggy as it does not show lens data any more in the EXIFs
-
Back from my morning job. Holy communion. 23 kids. Studio portraits and journalistic documentation of event.
Big group shot.
Bad mixed light. Low light at times.
D600 with AF-S 1.8/85mm and Ai-S 1.4/35mm later
D500 with AF-S 1.4/24mm
Old Wisdom: both lenses are really slow when it comes to AF. The 85 is a tad faster than the 24.
New wisdom: Snail race over. Both run Usian Bolt style on a D500. Friend with the D5 report similar.
Annotation. D750 and D810 are in fact better in puncto AF than D600. Compared to the new generation they are
olympic runner snails. Sorry. I can only compare lenses I use daily. As far as I understand. Fast AF lenses like
70-200 or 24-70 from the trinity do not show such an extreme jump.
For me, using only fast primes this is a revelation.
-
Next point. Battery milage. I took 1123 RAW+JPEG and
needed less than two EN-EL 15. With the fast XQD, Lexar 2933x
I estimate 750 RAW+JPEG from my first experience.
Yes. I did not use the fresh unconditioned from the unboxing.
I used two well conditioned older Batteries in very good health status.
PS. I very very rarely use the display. So you have to discount that.
-
Next Point: Eye detection AF-C works wonderfully, with ~75% hit rate in rather difficult situations.
Beware of glasses though. The algorithm seems to have some issues with glasses, esp. reflecting ones. In such a case in a row of people you will hit the person second in line if you do not do something about it. I guess I will assign a function button to switch to single point manual selection AF for two or three shots, if that is possible.
Pictures.
First: One of about five out of 17 kids in the "enlighting" situation. Last week with D600 and Ai-S 1.4/35mm @f=4 ... technical next to none were OK, pictorial less ...
Second: One of about 15 of 23 kids in the "enlighting" situation. Today with the D500 and AF-S 1.4/24mm @f=2.8 ... technically next to all were OK, pictorial less, but this is a hectic situation...
EXIF should be readable in both
-
A few shots with the D500 & AFS 200mm/2.
All photos unprocessed. Just resized to 1500x1000
In the first picture, the dog was running straight to me. Nice that the AF system kept the eye in focus.
rgds, Andy
-
Frank,
I used NX-2 as the only tool for post processing for years. Loved it like you.
Until Jan 2016 - as I had only "old" cameras which were supported by NX-2.
With recent camera acquistions this year, there was the need to move forward, not backward.
After much "resistance", I gave NX-D a try - and to much my surprise, I could do all the things with NX-D I did with NX-2.
Of course the menu structure was different, but after one evening, familiarity is now here as well.
A few things are even easier and more obvious than with NX-2 - so the pain is not really there.
( ...)
Andy
From a working point of view I found NX-D, which I downloaded to have a play with a couple of NEF's from some of the latest Nikon DSLR models, such as the D500, less of a dissapointment then I feared it would be after reading many reports on it. Admittedly I only make adjustments to WB and exposure in NX-D, after which I export the file into NX2 which I keep using as my main processing software (love those color points), so my experiences maybe aren't extensive enough to get frustrated over it.
Only disadvantage is that the NX-D NEF's are exported into NX2 as TIFF's, which for a D800 lossless compressed 12 bit NEF still boils down to a well over 200MB TIFF, and for a similar file for my DF for a nearly 100MB TIFF. Fortunately my Macbook Pro can handle such big files well, but I may need to give my storage a second look.
-
A few shots with the D500 & AFS 200mm/2.
All photos unprocessed. Just resized to 1500x1000
In the first picture, the dog was running straight to me. Nice that the AF system kept the eye in focus.
rgds, Andy
Apart from the nice camera, that 200/2 is really sublime.
Very cute dog. What breed is this?
-
Simone,
today was a day with the AFS 200m/2 and the AFS 70-200mm/2.8 VR II. It is always a nice experience to see the 200mm/2 performance. Combined with the quick AFS motor in the lens and the fast AF system of the D500, it really worked like a charm.
Thanks for the comment on the dog. It is our 6 month old "puppy" and the breed is a "swiss white shepherd (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Shepherd)"
rgds, Andy
A few with the zoom lens (slight crops, but otherwise unaltered photos)
Play time .....
1) accelerate
2) top speed
3) full stop
-
Thanks! Haven't seen them much around here despite the 'Swiss' in the name. This is certainly one of my favorite breeds, at least from the looks. The action shots with the 70-200 are also nice, of course that lens is more flexible when things are moving towards you or away from you. But the 200/2 just has a presence that few lenses have. Sooner or later I will get one of those :D
-
Really nice action shots of the dog, Andy. Also tehe 200/2 shots are nicew to watch (not a big surprise). :)
-
My guess is that the USB-trouble hat to do with power management issues. It seems after a certain while of shoveling data over the USB3-connection the D500 gets bored and shuts down...
Workaround: Instead of doing a direct transfer from XQD to HD I take a route via SSD which is fast enough, altough the HD speed of 120MB/s should not limit the USB3-connection.
Still: The 90MB/s read of the Samsung Pro SDHC is significantly faster than D500-USB3 via cable from a 440MB/s rated Lexar XQD. The USB3 connection on the D500 seems to be clearly limited.
I tested that on an ASUS/Intel board with a) Intel USB3-chipset and b) NEC-USB3-chipset. Both are really fast with my Kingston UDMA7 card reader
-
Being a, not very experienced, hobbyist, I dont feel I can review a camera or lens. However, I can safely say that D500 is a very good tool. You can feel the quality, AF is excellent and the colors superb. All this has already been said by Frank. I simply agree.
I post some pictures taken as jpegs with the 300mm PF lens + TC-14E III.
-
Here they are
-
Got my copy on thursday. Lightroom needs a patch to V6.5 to be able to read D500s NEFs. Appears to be buggy as it does not show lens data any more in the EXIFs
LR 6.51 is supposed to fix the bug - Adobe acknowledged the error and announced a fix.
-
LR 6.51 is supposed to fix the bug - Adobe acknowledged the error and announced a fix.
LR 6.51 is released today.
-
Being a, not very experienced, hobbyist, I dont feel I can review a camera or lens. However, I can safely say that D500 is a very good tool. You can feel the quality, AF is excellent and the colors superb. All this has already been said by Frank. I simply agree.
I post some pictures taken as jpegs with the 300mm PF lens + TC-14E III.
Elsid
Pretty good for a 'not experienced hobbyist'!!
JJ
-
Last night I sat on a balcony with a friend, having a beer. I took some shots there. The D500 focusses, where I could never see any focus and she sees color where I can not see color:
These are taken with the D500 and 1.4/24G @f=1.4 and 30th to 50th of a second. ISO is in the 20.000 area...
-
JJ, It has been about 2.5 years that I became serious about photography. I try my best. Thanks for your appreciation.
-
http://www.ebay.de/itm/like/291666634118?clk_rvr_id=1023005753950&item=291666634118&lgeo=1&vectorid=229487&rmvSB=true
It came today. I get 230MB/s over the NEC-Interface. Much better. Thank you.
-
Some thoughts and pictures...
There is no shortcut to a decent picture, even not with a camera so darn fast. Faster than anything I had in my hands before and I own a D3 since April 2008.
Risk is to expose a lot of shots which are there only for one reason: to hit the delete button.
The D600 with 1.4/35 Ai-S slown me down. That is a feature.
With the D500 and 1.4/24 AF-S I have to slow down myself. That is a new experience.
There is sure not any equivalence, strange geometricals to begin with. Look!!! :::
1) D600 + 1.4/35 AI-S
2) D500 + 1.4/24 G
-
And here are some shots I took today, the slow down exercise:
1) gilden hangman
2) wrinkle pinkle
3) Frank explains: Lichen eat stone!
4) underwarter fern
5) Jutta and Ilse are waiting for the rest of the family
-
Nice rendering in the last set. What lens was this shot with?
If I were you, I would correct the purple fringes though. Especially in shot 3 they are a bit too prominent to be ignored.
-
Frank
I like 5) a lot especially the title
JJ
-
Frank, you are being a very bad boy... :)
Nice sets. You do have master namer strike, giving new meaning to the images.
-
Simone: lens & camera are so recent they have not found their way into all correction algorithms yet.
Paco & JJ: thank you. I would not have taken the shot without the story in mind. The shot is bland. The story is bold.
-
Double exposure seems to work fine as well 8) :
-
Only receiving my D500 tomorrow so - for once - arriving late to the scene. I admit the D500 makes me a bit curious and I'll do my best to learn if not master the new camera with the widest possible range of Nikkors, old and new, in the days ahead.
-
If one wants to see a huge collection of D500 shots go to the Scotland thread.
Andrea, Chris and me had one.
There seem to be some minor firmware issues. Nothing that cannot be resolved with battery out for 30 seconds (totally stuck)
...
happend to me once ... several times for Chris ... or factory reset (AF dead)
-
Thanks Frank. As much as I have enjoyed, and am enjoying, the Scotland 2016 images, I am really watching action Sports and fast Bird shooters. That is as in fast birds and fast acquisition of birds caught in my peripheral vision). It is really interesting how different people see different things and interpret what they are seeing.
I'm very happy with the D750, D3S, Df but not so happy with the D7100, which I have given to my son but still use. I could really handle the buffer, better AF and higher ISO ;) .
Shame that a new version of the DBS(Dead Battery Syndrome) is back but I will not be looking to buy a D500 until October when the Soccer and birding seasons return. By that time Nikon may have admitted the problem and put out a Firmware fix. A bit disappointed in the new Auto Fine Tune but several friends have been able to use it effectively. Probably a 'work in progress' . I agree with Jim Farrell , it could be easily simplified in the mechanics.
Keep enjoying your D500 and posting images,
Cheers,
Tom
-
Chris and me certainly did chase some fast birds very efficiently with our D500s on the Isle of May.
Puffins are small and go at 60 km/h ... Chris has a lot of experience with birding and says the D500 is second to none.
-
I'm hearing pretty much the same from the Birders but not from the Sports shooters. They are saying probably the best Dx but not in the league of the better FX cameras. I like Chris's Puffin images but agree about the lens and distances. His Kittiwakes image is of more interest since shot against a background. To be honest , almost any Nikon will get good BIFs against the sky. I will be very happy if it beats the acquisition and positive lock speed of my gripped D300s. The D750 is darn near even and the D3S is better but not the D7100 or D610. I do like your Cormorant image.
Tom
-
I do like your Cormorant image. Tom
I only just start to do tele & action at all. The AF-performace and hit rate in the playing dogs series -see post #310 in the Scotland thread- is certainly well above what my D3 could do and the D500 is only a 2.000 Euro DX camera. We had the D810 against the D500 when we did the puffins and we have some puffins in front of chaotic BG. I did not develop these. Also here tzhe Hit rate is fascinating, would probably be much better with lower subject distance.
White Gulls in front of a white/grey/black rocks did also go very well, but these birds are quite slow. The Guillemonts and razerbills are really fast and could not be so easily seperatt from the rocks not even with the bare eyes
-
A serious upgrade in the battery department. These are ENELOOP black, 2500 mAh per piece x8 = 20.000 mWh = 2 Watt hours. With another 1900 mWh battery in the Camera I should be well into the 9000 exposure region. More than enough for a day of sports shooting or birding. Also a nice counter balance for bigger glass.
-
The camera was not at fault here. It nailed the focus always. The fault was totally to my lack of experience with holding, aiming and shooting a 500mm lens (first time in my life).
Also the settings for VR and Af and shutter speed and ISO and exposure correction are anything but optimized. Chris helped me, but this was just a drop in an ocean of ignorance.
-
Frank, practice this with auto-ISO perhaps?
Manual Mode. Fix speed to between 1/500 - 1/1000". Fix aperture to f/5.6. Set Auto-ISO to on to take care of the exposure.
Now, set focusing to back of camera on AE-L button.
Set AF-C. Choose one of the clustered AF point settings.
Set Ch for burst shooting.
One initial AF lock-on is not always enough! So perform AF lock-on more than once with your thumb as you are panning and tracking the bird while engaging the shutter to make bursts of shots with your other finger.
Remember the camera does not do the tracking of the bird, rather the photographer does the tracking of the bird with the help of the camera's tracking settings.
I'm sure you will get this. Practice makes perfect, yes?? ;D ;D ;D
-
Thank you Andrea. Practice. Practice. Practice. That is the idea. Have to try the swallows in our backyard.
These are darn fast. Oh my...
yet this special kind hunts mostly at dusk when light levels are really low.
on the island we had f=8 plus t=1/800 s easily at low ISO
here it will be more the upper limit.... 20k ISO... difficult.
-
Remember that when practicing, poor-quality images due to high ISO's are not necessarily important...
For swallows, the shutter speed should be at least 1/2000!
-
Thank you, peter!
-
For me with all other cameras the development in Photo Ninja is superior than the development in Camera Manufacturer Software.
Not yet with the D500. I cannot reach the quality of the Nikon JPEG
1) conversion in ViewNX-i
2) calibrated conversion in Photo Ninja 1.3.3c
Verdict: The PN shot lacks in green differentiation a lot, the shots get very coarse and are then ironed down by Noise Ninja, so colour information and details are lost.
-
A serious upgrade in the battery department. These are ENELOOP black, 2500 mAh per piece x8 = 20.000 mWh = 2 Watt hours. With another 1900 mWh battery in the
Not even close Frank ;D ;D
Wh is Ah times the resting voltage of the battery, the latter is 1.2V for NiMH and 7.4V for Li-ion with two cells (just ignore the 7.0V mentioned on the EN-EL15).
So for the mentioned batteries the Wh is:
- EN-EL15: 1.9Ah x 7.4V = 14Wh (the correct Wh is mentioned on the back of the battery)
- Eneloop Pro: 2.5Ah x 1.2V x 8 = 24Wh
So combined you have 38Wh which is 2.7 times what a single EN-EL15 would do :)
-
Frank: bad green colour is a sure sign PhotoNinja has inadequate profiles for D500. I experienced the same with Df the first half year or so.
-
Not even close Frank ;D ;D
Wh is Ah times the resting voltage of the battery, the latter is 1.2V for NiMH and 7.4V for Li-ion with two cells (just ignore the 7.0V mentioned on the EN-EL15).
So for the mentioned batteries the Wh is:
- EN-EL15: 1.9Ah x 7.4V = 14Wh (the correct Wh is mentioned on the back of the battery)
- Eneloop Pro: 2.5Ah x 1.2V x 8 = 24Wh
So combined you have 38Wh which is 2.7 times what a single EN-EL15 would do :)
I should stay away from math when I am tired
38Wh instead og 20 means I can shoot two consecutive days..
-
Frank: bad green colour is a sure sign PhotoNinja has inadequate profiles for D500. I experienced the same with Df the first half year or so.
need a new profile or profiles. But that is not the only issue. NX-D delivers all those beautiful fine details
PN cannot yet develop. Yesterday I did a group shot and can show later the difference.
-
As I ran my first batch of D500 NEFs through PhotoNinja, I can verify this converter isn't up to the challenge of dealing with D500 yet. I do have the slightly older version (1.25 I believe) which could explain some of the inferior results, but not all of them. I dislike the idea of splurging more money to Picturecode unless their product gets closer to the promised v.2, though. For now, I can do some internal tweaking in PN and/or use the jpgs if necessary.
Slowly getting closer to learn the camera. At least I managed to turn OFF the pesky Wi-Fi/NFC Snapbridge "feature" in the menus and will ask my Nikon repair tech to decouple it internally if possible. The form factor of the D500 required a little bit of Dremel action on one of my GPS units from Foolography before it would seat itself correct. A few drops of silicone sealant completed the job. GPS is now working. I took some satisfaction in removing and throwing away the rubber covers for the front PC flash/10 pin terminal as well. I found an older L-bracket in my bins that fits adequately. Got an XQD Express Card adapter perfect to slide into the relevant port of my Thinkpads. Thus I'm all set to play around with the camera and a lot of DX and FX lenses in the days ahead.
-
Wow, that is a surprise, Bjørn. I'm quite happy with the D500 fotos which are converted in Photo Ninja.
-
Bjørn: Which of the older L-brackets work???
AndreaB: I got some nice results from PN133c but the NX-D-results of the very same files smoke them all.
I will show the difference in the Scotland-Thread as soon as I find some minutes to do so.
-
I'm using Photo Ninja 1.3.1b Everything looks good for D500.
To illustrate, I'll use a snapshot of the Loch Tay Lodge grounds which I made to show back home.
(1) This is the unedited JPG extracted from the raw NEF. It was resized to a 1200 pixel width. It may preserve some of the sharpening set in the Pic Control.
(2) This is a JPG made from the Photo Ninja conversion. In order to match the OOC JPG of #1, during that conversion I opened up the shadows a bit (Illum +5 & Shadows +.55) and increased contrast a bit (+10) and increased saturation (Plain +70, up from default +50). That's it. No sharpening was added during or after the conversion.
The extracted JPG looks pretty much like the converted JPG to me. The extracted JPG has slightly higher contrast, but that could be added to the conversion.
-
I forgot to add that there is some distortion control and chromatic abberation control in the D500 JPG engine. Photo Ninja "loses" both of those correction during its conversion.
So if you layered these photos and diffed them, you would see that distortion correction show up. And you can see the aqua tint in some of the trees in the PN conversion due to uncorrected chromatic aberration. Photo Ninja does have a chrom abb tool, but I did not take the time. Don't hold that against PN, OK?? ;D ;D ;D
[On a side note here: I feel slightly stupid for not being upgraded to PN 1.3.3c. Oh well.]
-
I downloaded the old Photo Ninja 1.2.5. It gave me the exact same conversion as did 1.3.1b.
Bjørn, you must have had something set wrong???
-
I just have checked PhotoNinja (1.25) vs NX-D (1.41? just downloaded and installed latest version) on a fresh set of D500 NEFs.
In terms of colour, there is little to no difference. I left w/b to Auto and apparently the in-camera setting has followed through also in PN.
As to resolution of detail, NX-D might occasionally be slightly better, but overall contrast tends to be lower, so what is gained first easily is lost later.
PN produces grainer images unless an extra noise-reduction step is taken later. The increased grain and associated contrast boost, however, also may give better rendition of low-contrast detail.
In terms of UI both programs are fiddly and non-intuitive. NX-D is by far the slowest on my Win7/64 box (32 GB, 8 core, SSDs all though).
-
A nice summary, Bjørn.
I have just one little problem. The newest Capture NX-D will not display my D500 images. You can imagine what I think about that. ;D ;D ;D
Between Photo Ninja and the older Capture NX2, I could find no real differences in conversion resolution, grain, etc. In all such pairings (old version or new versions) there will be distortion differences because I don't think PN carries lens distortion data.
-
Download and install again. No problem here with NX-D and D500 files.
-
Bjørn: at first I did not find all the bells and whistles I loved in NX2. But then I graped the underlying logic of NX-D (1.4.0 I use on windows) and it hit me. I can easily use "vivid" style without losing detail and after that do some Unsharp Mask and LCH edit and distortion control and color fine tuning by channnel. Very intersting.
Noise it trouble in PN 133c with D500 files. It means using Noise Ninja which has no proper noise profile for the D500 yet and irons down the details. I speak of files up to ISO 20.000 here.
The NX-D solution is much more elegant, better preserves the details and manages to make the noise look nice and being helpful in downsizing.
-
Had NX-D deviated from the established Nikon software pattern and run fast and smoothly, I might perhaps be willing to live with its clunkiness. However, it operates at a glacial speed and devours memory with even greater appetite than PhotoNinja.
-
A nice summary, Bjørn.
I have just one little problem. The newest Capture NX-D will not display my D500 images. You can imagine what I think about that. ;D ;D ;D
Between Photo Ninja and the older Capture NX2, I could find no real differences in conversion resolution, grain, etc. In all such pairings (old version or new versions) there will be distortion differences because I don't think PN carries lens distortion data.
If you wish to continue using NX2 for your D500 EF's, this guy might have the solution for you
http://www.bagnon.com/raw2nef/
Works with Nikon Capture NX 2, version 2.4.6, and supports the following cameras: Sony A6000, Sony A7, Sony A7II, Sony A7R, Nikon D750, Nikon 7200, Nikon D810, Nikon D500 and Nikon D5.
I have none of these camera's but in the past downloaded D810 and D750 NEF's to play with. Worked like a charm with those files, with all the options of NX2 available.
I see no reason to expect it to behave different with a.o. D500 NEF's, nor have I so far read any feedback reporting otherwise,
It's free (although you can give a donation if you want) so little risk or investment required as far as that's concerned.
-
The web site does not go into any detail what is done to the RAW file(s). My guess is that the file header is altered so NX2 believes the file comes from an eligible camera. If that be so, the trick is old news.
-
I see little reason to inject raw files from Sony into CNX2, when they are already natively supported by PhotoNinja, Capture 1 and Lightroom/ACR and more. You will lose support for lens correction and may struggle with less than optimal camera colour profiles as well. The same may apply to Nikon cameras and lenses released after the sad demise of CNX2, sad since since I liked the results from CNX2 when I used Nikon DSLRs.
-
The new DP Review of the Nikon D500 (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d500) is in.
Result = Gold Award
"The D500 is the most well-rounded DSLR we've ever tested."
In a nutshell, the D500's image quality is only a hair above the finest ASP-C cameras, but its overall handling, rugged durability, and ability to AF and handle "live action" utterly destroys the competition.
Other notable quotes:
- "Cameras such as the Canon EOS 7D Mark II and Sony's a6300 appear to offer comparable capabilities on paper, but these appearances prove deceptive in real-world use: the D500's autofocus and continuous shooting performance is noticeably better."
- "Autofocus is the D500's great strength: along with the D5 it's the best we've ever used. Just as mirrorless cameras appear to be closing the gap when it comes to following simple subjects, the D500 comes and blows them (and its DSLR rivals) all out of the water."
- " ... as an APS-C sports and wildlife camera, the D500 is without rival, and that puts in on the top of our awards podium."
Enjoy,
Jack
-
Nice rating, but as mentioned in the D810 - Warning thread; You might want to take care when handling due to the plastic mirror-box and less than adequate mount screws.
-
The web site does not go into any detail what is done to the RAW file(s). My guess is that the file header is altered so NX2 believes the file comes from an eligible camera.
That's correct
If that be so, the trick is old news.
True, but for computer illiterate people like me it's a real find though.
I just can open the program, select the original NEF's, and drag them into the drop box. The program copies and renames them, and I'm of to go, without having to do deal with all the necessary trappings myself.
-
Exiftool is the de facto standard for doing stuff like this. For example, change the camera model to 'Nikon D3' for all NEFs in the current directory, this is the simple command line order to run,
EXiftool -model="NIKON D3" *.NEF
I think it's difficult to envision anything simpler to achieve the goal.
Just download the Exiftool program from the author's site www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/ and follow instructions to install it. Phil Harvey, the shy hero behind this gem of utility tool, will listen and if possible implement to nearly all wishes you direct to him. I once had an issue with Fuji RAFs, sent Phil and e-mail, and got an answer within a few hours after he had published a new version of Exiftool capable of dealing with the Fuji files.
-
Reinstalled NX-D to try again. Bjørn R - thank you for the "cure".
Paul - I do have the Raw2Nef program but had forgotten about it, so thank you for the reminder!
Bjørn T - Agree that I would not try to stuff a Sony file into NX2 because too much would be lost. I think the Raw2Nef works best for Nikon files.
-
ExifTool is nice, but Raw2Nef makes it easy to configure the conversion you want. You can set up permanent templates.
-
The new DP Review of the Nikon D500 (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d500) is in.
Result = Gold Award
"The D500 is the most well-rounded DSLR we've ever tested."
In a nutshell, the D500's image quality is only a hair above the finest ASP-C cameras, but its overall handling, rugged durability, and ability to AF and handle "live action" utterly destroys the competition.
Other notable quotes:
- "Cameras such as the Canon EOS 7D Mark II and Sony's a6300 appear to offer comparable capabilities on paper, but these appearances prove deceptive in real-world use: the D500's autofocus and continuous shooting performance is noticeably better."
- "Autofocus is the D500's great strength: along with the D5 it's the best we've ever used. Just as mirrorless cameras appear to be closing the gap when it comes to following simple subjects, the D500 comes and blows them (and its DSLR rivals) all out of the water."
- " ... as an APS-C sports and wildlife camera, the D500 is without rival, and that puts in on the top of our awards podium."
Enjoy,
Jack
There is one caveat in the comparison to the mirrorless Sony A6300: The Nikon D500 will have the better AF tracking, but the Sony A6300 won't have front- or back focus issues, so choose your tool wisely.
-
Why would I have frontfocus or backfocus issues with the D500? I haven't seen that so far. Not sure what you mean?
-
I'm not saying that your particular D500 will have it, but it's a known problem for DSLRs. The D500 even offers a special calibration tool to correct it.
-
There is one caveat in the comparison to the mirrorless Sony A6300: The Nikon D500 will have the better AF tracking, but the Sony A6300 won't have front- or back focus issues, so choose your tool wisely.
Bjorn, since I would only be buying the D500 for fast sports, birds and events the a6300 would be taking a real chance (and expensive with lenses). No matter how many times I work on using the EM1 and a7II, the EVF just doesn't work unless I want to shoot at longer range for the FL. Then it is still not up to the OVF of my Nikons. Sure, I get the odd reasonable image but I cannot depend on getting the one I really want. I need to pick up the target immediately and know that the AF is going to lock immediately. Maybe it is just me but I have yet to see images that make me thing so .
I really do like EVFs for some things but not for fast, erratic action. I'll take my chances with having to fine tune.
Tom
-
Bjorn, since I would only be buying the D500 for fast sports, birds and events the a6300 would be taking a real chance (and expensive with lenses). No matter how many times I work on using the EM1 and a7II, the EVF just doesn't work unless I want to shoot at longer range for the FL. Then it is still not up to the OVF of my Nikons. Sure, I get the odd reasonable image but I cannot depend on getting the one I really want. I need to pick up the target immediately and know that the AF is going to lock immediately. Maybe it is just me but I have yet to see images that make me thing so .
I really do like EVFs for some things but not for fast, erratic action. I'll take my chances with having to fine tune.
Tom
Which is what I wrote in my post preceding Andrea's answer to me.
AF tracking and speed => Nikon D500
Precise AF without AF calibration => Sony A6300
Choose the tool accordingly.
The AF tracking capability is not really a viewfinder issue, but a sensor issue in the case of mirrorless. Likewise it's not the OVF that gives the D500 its' tracking capability, but the AF sensor.
-
There is one caveat in the comparison to the mirrorless Sony A6300: The Nikon D500 will have the better AF tracking, but the Sony A6300 won't have front- or back focus issues, so choose your tool wisely.
That is a caveat in your head only.
Every real-world comparison of the D500 and the A6300 shows the A6300 is left way behind, way behind, when it comes to AF ability.
They are very similar in image quality, with the slight advantage to the Nikon, but in AF excellence the D500 blows the Sony out of the water.
-
Nice rating, but as mentioned in the D810 - Warning thread; You might want to take care when handling due to the plastic mirror-box and less than adequate mount screws.
This is nonsense.
From what I have read, any "plastic" components on the D500 are thermoplastic, stronger than steel, but much lighter, making it better to have than magnesium.
I have been shooting my D810 for awhile now, with a heavy 300 f/2.8 VR II on it, with ZERO issues.
I do not make it a habit to drop my expensive equipment all over the place, so I can't tell you how resilient the setup is, because I am not a fumbler by nature.
But I do hike the deserts, mountains, and canyons of CA, with the lens and camera over my shoulder, locked onto my tripod, and everything is okay ;D
When B&H finally sends me my ordered D500, I will be doing the same thing with it 8)
Jack
-
Bjorn, I am not talking about tracking. I'm talking about being able to pick up a play, in case of soccer, when the ball goes to a completely different player in a different direction. I rarely shoot bursts these days and normally not more than a 3 or 4 shot burst . Two or more guys going for a header and trying to catch the exact moment of impact gets a burst :). Shots on goal is another. EVFs are just not there at this point. It is another thing when you know exactly where the action is taking place, any Gym meet or even some track and field events for instance. You can get your dof and speed right and probably catch most of the action.
One of a three shot burst with the D3S,70-200vrII at dusk. I had to follow the ball cleared down field and the pickup the two players as the ball came down. All in a few seconds.
(https://images.nikonians.org/galleries/data/12399/medium/D3C_2126.jpg)
Tom
-
Bjorn, I am not talking about tracking. I'm talking about being able to pick up a play, in case of soccer, when the ball goes to a completely different player in a different direction. I rarely shoot bursts these days and normally not more than a 3 or 4 shot burst . Two or more guys going for a header and trying to catch the exact moment of impact gets a burst :). Shots on goal is another. EVFs are just not there at this point. It is another thing when you know exactly where the action is taking place, any Gym meet or even some track and field events for instance. You can get your dof and speed right and probably catch most of the action.
One of a three shot burst with the D3S,70-200vrII at dusk. I had to follow the ball cleared down field and the pickup the two players as the ball came down. All in a few seconds.
(https://images.nikonians.org/galleries/data/12399/medium/D3C_2126.jpg)
Tom
The issue is the readout rate from the sensor, rather than the EVF. The EVF can do 120 fps, but it can't get image data fast enough, and the EVF is the last member in the chain.
-
That is a caveat in your head only.
Every real-world comparison of the D500 and the A6300 shows the A6300 is left way behind, way behind, when it comes to AF ability.
They are very similar in image quality, with the slight advantage to the Nikon, but in AF excellence the D500 blows the Sony out of the water.
Follow this link: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-a6300/sony-a6300A.HTM
Scroll down and you will see an image of the all metal frame parts that are used for the camera body as well as lens mount and support. This is something different than the plastic mirrorbox in the D500. The D500 is almost twice the price of the A6300, yet it has unfortunately only gotten a thermoplastic a.k.a. polycarbonate a.k.a. plastic mirrorbox. Nikon DSLRs have gone from all metal to plastic mirrorbox, except the D5. Sony has gone the other direction with the A6300 and the second generation A7 bodies, and moved to all metal bodies. I wonder what's going on. :o
The A7 mkII with its all metall body feels much nicer to handle and much more rugged than the original A7, that had plastic parts. I feel very comfortable, knowing that my Sony A7 mkII can take a beating, with a metall frame and an AF that stays precise without need for calibration. It may not AF track like a D500, but it's got a rugged body. 8)
To the moderators, sorry for straying a bit off topic.
-
bjornthun, what's a rugged camera body if it makes no photos?
it's nice that you have apologised to the moderators, but you might also consider apologising to the entire community?
then, if you would like to continue to talk about other cameras than the D500, please open up a separate thread concerning those cameras and stop polluting this thread.
-
BT: open a new thread in which Sonys are the main target of attention. That will give less cross-talk and thread pollution.
The admins will happily assist in moving relevant post(s) into such a thread.
-
Sorry to everyone, for going a bit off topic. :)
BR and Jakov, I've had my say about rugged, metal (mirrorless!) cameras, no need for any new thread. ;)
-
This is nonsense.
From what I have read, any "plastic" components on the D500 are thermoplastic, stronger than steel, but much lighter, making it better to have than magnesium.
I have been shooting my D810 for awhile now, with a heavy 300 f/2.8 VR II on it, with ZERO issues.
I do not make it a habit to drop my expensive equipment all over the place, so I can't tell you how resilient the setup is, because I am not a fumbler by nature.
But I do hike the deserts, mountains, and canyons of CA, with the lens and camera over my shoulder, locked onto my tripod, and everything is okay ;D
When B&H finally sends me my ordered D500, I will be doing the same thing with it 8)
Jack
From what you have read,,,, Hmmm sounds like your and armchair photographer ;)
Thermoplastic or not, the ' resistance' to real wold use will only show itself after a period of time/use such like the real cases reported here and in other forums.
Sure most of these are results of 'drops' but that is a pretty good indication of the long term durability of the parts.
Seems to me you need to look further into what goes into engineering, especially with regards to materials and their properties.
To get another thing clear, I'm not in the habit of dropping my gear,,,
-
No sane photographer has a habit of "dropping gear". That would be disruptive to the work flow. However, in real life, accidents can occur, even when one tries to avoid them. Any working photographer is familiar with such basic facts.
It is high time to get this and other threads back on track.
-
Nikon already released a Firmware-update for the D500
http://downloadcenter.nikonimglib.com/en/download/fw/184.html (http://downloadcenter.nikonimglib.com/en/download/fw/184.html)
Official reason:
Fixed an issue that sometimes resulted in the options for SETUP MENU > Language not displaying correctly.
I would not be surprised if this also fixes other minor issues without notification.
-
23 MB program for fixing just a language issue in SETUP appears "a little" on the massive overkill side of things.
Installed the firmware update right now, will report if anything unusual is manifested.
-
Maybe the entire firmware including the fix is installed, and not just the delta comprising the fix?
Sony firmware updates are well over 100MB, if memory serves, but Sony cams run a mini version of Linux.
-
I hope it fixes the complete halt and reset issues Chris an me had. I only had two. One healed with battery in/out
The other with complete factory reset.
-
I hope it fixes the complete halt and reset issues Chris an me had. I only had two. One healed with battery in/out
The other with complete factory reset.
I've just read this;
http://www.cameraegg.org/nikon-d500-firmware-version-1-01-and-en-el15-battery-li-ion01-exchange-available/
It seems the battery problem is acknowledged/addressed by Nikon.
-
I have just sent my one and only Li-ion01 battery to the Nikon Service Point in the Netherlands to get it replaced. It indeed performed very poorly in my D500 (fully loaded started at 60% only and drained very fast) vs. the other Li-on20 versions I have of the EN-EL15 battery.
-
It's on the Nikon Europe website as well.
This is customer service as it should be; well done
-
I got two EN-EL15 I bought with my D600 in 2013. Both are labelled "Li-ion01". The third one must be the one from the D500 it is labelled "Li-ion20". Thanks for the hint!
-
Interesting information about the Li-ion01 and Li-ion02 versions of the EN-EL15.
My D810 was acquired in October 2014 and its EN-EL15 batteries are all of the Li-ion02 version.
I wonder when the Li-ion01 batteries were upgraded to the Li-ion02 version? Obviously sometime between when Frank got his D600 and I got the D810, but can anyone improve on this?
-
Interesting information about the Li-ion01 and Li-ion02 versions of the EN-EL15.
My D810 was acquired in October 2014 and its EN-EL15 batteries are all of the Li-ion02 version.
I wonder when the Li-ion01 batteries were upgraded to the Li-ion02 version? Obviously sometime between when Frank got his D600 and I got the D810, but can anyone improve on this?
According to the Japanese "Impress Watch", EN-EL15 was updated to Li-ion20 in the summer of 2013. The capacity remained unchanged but its discharge characteristics was changed, according to the news (text in Japanese):
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/1002957.html
-
I just received my D500. Will be reading through this thread to learn from my fellow 'togs'. 😊
-
Just got a call from my local Nikon repair facility. They have a lot of *new* EN-EL15 batteries for me compliments of Nikon Nordic and the D500 battery recall action. The recall had a limit of 5 batteries per customer and I filled my quota to the maximum.
Whatever the underlying reason for the recall, fact is I got a bunch of fresh new batteries instead of my old worn ones. For free. Good for me, the D500, D800, V1, or any other camera of mine using the EN-EL15. I had purchased a few of the 'good' version of the EN-EL15 already thus my camera battery bin is pretty much overflowing at the moment.
I probably will separate work flows so as to confine manual lenses to the Df and AF/AFS to the D500. Despite this division, there is nothing wrong with the capability of D500 to focus manually even very tricky optics such as the 50/1.2 Nikkor.
-
I am still impressed with the D500 but with good light I still prefer the D600 for portraits.
Never had a camera with such fine skin tones.
And I am still fighting with processing D500 files above ISO 1000 ... PN does no proper NR
and the NR in NX-D is difficult to handle for me ....
Below ISO 1000 files can generally be opened in NX-D and saved without any change. Just perfect.
That is also true for many files above ISO 1000 but not for all. Look into the Daily blog my entries for
9 June. Birds taken with the 300PF ... higher ISO shots really gave me headace to process.
-
I went this morning to the NSP nearby and swapped my 3 old ones by new ones!
-
I went this morning to the NSP nearby and swapped my 3 old ones by new ones!
my 2 new batteries are in the post
-
Birds taken with the 300PF ... higher ISO shots really gave me headace to process.
It may also be partly due to the lens. It seems to render detail very well when the subject detail and/or lighting are/is contrasty, but for low contrast detail in low contrast light, it doesn't do so well (I think it's the residual diffraction that clouds the low contrast details). If the lighting is dim, the noise is added to the effect of the aberrations of the lens, making it difficult to obtain a crisply detailed image. A conventional refractive lens may work better.
-
Thank you Ilkka. The lens is it for now. I want a light weight solution for starting tele work.
-
Frank, I don't know what results you are getting ITO noise, but I have found for BIF that noise on the feathers tends to look a little like feather detail when zooming out a bit. Thus at high ISO I tend just to do NR on the background and eyes.
Don't know if that helps at all.
-
Anyone got the wifi connection sussed or is Snapbridge the only road to Rome?
-
Get an XQD card ...
-
Anyone got the wifi connection sussed or is Snapbridge the only road to Rome?
Snapbridge is the only way and it's not yet available for iPhone (September?) only Android based phones.
-
Silly implementation of wifi.
-
Apparently SnapBridge is less silly than Nikon Mobile Utility which can only make your Nikon DSLR behave like a smartphone. :o :o :o
-
There are so many third party apps that could be used if the damned camera could be connected to a network.
Besides, I fully agree with those saying that Nikon goofed big time by not allowing IOS users to take advantage of Snapbridge until the end of summer 2016.
I am considering returning the stupid camera.
-
Get an XQD card ... Forget wi-fi.
-
There are so many third party apps that could be used if the damned camera could be connected to a network.
Besides, I fully agree with those saying that Nikon goofed big time by not allowing IOS users to take advantage of Snapbridge until the end of summer 2016.
I am considering returning the stupid camera.
Because of the WiFi implementation? You're kidding.
-
For Nikon DSLRs without a proper wifi ( in 2016? :o ) there is CamRanger, that Sten can look into. It's another gadget, but it works. I assume that the purpose is remote control with liveview.
Edit: D500 is not yet listed as supported by CamRanger.
Edit2: Snapbridge looks like a cool feature and useful too with the opportunity of remote control. The iOS app won't be there until August though.
Composing on the iPad beats any LCD screens or viewfinders on a camera.
-
Of course I'm not returning the D500. It is an incredible picture conveyor machine. But I am a bit disappointed Nikon won't open its gates a bit more. Well, I may/should get a QXD card. What's the best deal out there?
-
The iOS app won't be there until August though.
Composing on the iPad beats any LCD screens or viewfinders on a camera.
Luckily there are plenty of Android tablets available for the next few months for Remote control usage.
Otherwise Bjorn's advice of an XQD card seems simple enough.
-
Sten: Interfoto sells XQD cards from Lexar at fairly acceptable price. I got a 32 GB card which suffices for my requirements thus far.
-
There are so many third party apps that could be used if the damned camera could be connected to a network.
Besides, I fully agree with those saying that Nikon goofed big time by not allowing IOS users to take advantage of Snapbridge until the end of summer 2016.
I am considering returning the stupid camera.
Knowin Nikon I expected Wifi not to work...
The X100T also has a stupid implementation of it although Fuji.
As long as I can disable it and it does not eat my batteries.
I still use a simple cable connection...
I do not understand what the SD slot is for.
I'd like a second XQD which make the camera run like Bolt.
At the time of delivery the market was sweeped. So I got all I could get which was 2 x 32GB Lexar 2933x
currently the best option seems to be the 128GB for 179€
-
In an emergency, getting any SD card will be far easier than locating another XQD ... I think this is a sensible compromise for a semi-professional camera.
I always put a few extra SD cards in the door pockets of my little red car and forget about them. This practice has saved my day on several occasions. SD cards have a short longevity any ways as they are so easily lost or deformed. In that respect, XQD is far superior but at their current price level and limited availability I prefer having a cheap alternative.
-
Yes. You are right. The ubiquity of SD on this planet makes it a good backup.
Plus you get 95MB/s real measured speed for 50€/64GB in the new Pro+ Samsung.
So bursts are shorter. Even with birds I very rarely do longer bursts than10. Usually 3 or 4 shots only.
-
Of course I'm not returning the D500. It is an incredible picture conveyor machine. But I am a bit disappointed Nikon won't open its gates a bit more. Well, I may/should get a QXD card. What's the best deal out there?
Watch out for BH photo campaigns.
I got a Lexar 128GB 2933x XQD for 180 USD inc shipping (+ norwegian vat)
But I agree with Bjørn that a smaller card is ok.
-
Yes. You are right. The ubiquity of SD on this planet makes it a good backup.
Plus you get 95MB/s real measured speed for 50€/64GB in the new Pro+ Samsung.
So bursts are shorter. Even with birds I very rarely do longer bursts than10. Usually 3 or 4 shots only.
even higher speeds are possible with relatively inexpensive cards - the D500 appears to take advantage of the new UHS-II cards (the ones with extra contacts.) in a quick test, a burst sequence of 1.8GB cleared the buffer in a shade under 15 seconds, or 115 MB/s write. the same batch took a bit under 10 seconds to copy to my computer, with a reported speed in windows explorer of 185MB/s read.
this kind of performance is very impressive for such inexpensive hardware, and quite a bit in excess of what the D810 can do. combine that with that camera's much larger files, and media/buffer performance is not much an issue on the D500 with SD.
-
Impress-watch posted a review comparing XQD (2933x, 440MB/s), UHS-II SD (2000x, 300MB/s) and the currently fastest UHS-I (633x, 95MB/s) in D500.
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/lexarxqd/1003928.html?utm_campaign=top_article&utm_medium=content-text&utm_source=dc.watch.impress.co.jp
They set D500 in the fast continuous shooting mode (10 frames/sec.). The result is:
Maximum amount of frames until the continuous shooting stops (frames, 14bit losslessly compressed RAW/RAW+JPEG fine):
XQD 200 (limited only by the camera spec)/108
UHS-II 102/38
UHS-I 37/26
Writing speed of 35 RAW/RAW+JPEG files:
XQD: too fast to measure/1.3 sec.
XQD (100 RAW/RAW+JPEG): too fast to measure/2.8 sec.
UHS-II: 2.0 sec./4.7 sec.
UHS-I: 12.2 sec./unable to shoot continuously
"Too fast to measure" means that they could only see the writing LED on D500 to light for several hundred "milliseconds" and they could start shooting immediately after, as if nothing had happened. It was so fast that they had no time to press the start button on the stop watch they used.
On the other hand, when they tested the mirroring mode using XQD and SD cards, the writing speed dropped drastically, as expected.
Frames they could shoot until the continuous shooting stops (RAW+JPEG):
XQD + UHS-II: 28
XQD+UHS-I: 25
RAW into XQD and JPEG fine into SD:
XQD + UHS-II: 58
XQD+UHS-I: 32
Hope this would be of any help.
-
A german user has sent Nikon a declaration to cease and desist about the crippled WLAN implementation in the D500, which requires Bluetooth connection as well.
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Kunde-vs-Nikon-Abmahnung-wegen-proprietaerem-WLAN-mit-Bluetooth-Zwang-3238593.html
Nikon hasn't responded yet officially.
rgds,
Andy
-
DxO issued their D500 sensor review ...... http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Nikon-D500-sensor-review-Performance-redefined
-
The D7200 has a better sensor???
-
One-dimensional measures may lead to one-dimensional minds ... Using a single number to describe a sensor's or camera's performance isn't particularly helpful. The D500 is head and shoulders above what Nikon has delivered in the DX field before. It is not the equivalent of a down-scaled D5. That puts the camera into a more appropriate perspective.
-
Bjørn, could you then provide us then with a two-dimensional review and broaden my one-dimensional mind?
-
Already have - and who said you were "one-dimensional" ??
The D500 is a very good camera. If you need a DX-format Nikon, this is the best the company has to offer. Never mind the numbers in particular Dx0.
-
The D7200 has a better sensor???
Some loss of signal quality is expected since the D500 can do 10fps continuous shooting. To achieve this, the sensor needs to be read faster than in a slower camera such as the D7200, and these fast reads may be slightly noisier. There may also be other factors such as priorities in the sensor design, the implementation of the EFCS feature etc.
I would not consider these small differences in image quality parameters to be of much practical significance.
-
The D500 ist a great camera. I own her now for roughly 6 weeks and she is a wonderful high tech monster combined with high tech "G" or "E" type glass.
As soon as you attach decent old MF glass she is a slow cat like any other camera AND she has a finder that is of the same quality as the D600 finder. Very good for focussing manually. Huge and bright.
Now the File Quality in Real life:
Given that the D600 (together with D810, 750, 610 and some Sony offerings) ist still the reference when it comes to shooting below 3200 ISO I compare the D500 and D600 in practical terms.
The D600 files need some editing most of the time but they are VERY RESILIENT. So you can torture them quite a lot and they still deliver smooth gradients, no artefacts and clean edges.
The D500 files are something else. If I get it right in camera the Expspeed5 delivers some magic info to the NX-D that makes editing D500 files: "open in NX-D" ==> "save as TIFF" ==> watch in Awe. This can be done as a batch. BEWARE of touching some harder measures (LCH, Curves, Sharpening) in either NX-D or Photoshop or NIK-Collection. The files will fall apart. There is no headroom, esp. not for files above 1000 ISO. Files in base ISO and up to rougly 800 ISO can be tortured quite a lot, but if you pixel peep you will see artefacts looking like JPEG artefacts and if I keep pushing like JPEG artifacts of consecutive JPEG compressions on the same file.
The D500 does something that has not been thought of as a huge problem before: She can deliver a very decent WB even in very bad mixed light. I can show you in a 1:1 D500:D600 what huge difference that can make, I have nice examples ...
-
What you describe can be mostly ascribed to the difference between DX and FX fomats. The latter always have been the more relaxed (or 'resilient' as you put it) to processing.
I agree about the w/b performance of the D500, it is really good. All the more important as Photo Ninja (PN) so far only has rudimentary support for D500 NEFs, but apparently is able to catch the in-camera w/b setting. Over at Picturecode they told me D500 for now uses D5000 profiles, which could explain some of the roughness one encounters with the NEFs in PN. They hoped next upgrade would remedy the situation though.
-
So the following is the truth and nothing but the truth about a REVOLUTION:
1) D600 & 1.4/35 AI-S
2) D500 & 1.4/35 Ai-S
IIRC all settings "M" and all setting same, same very bad mixed light, same perspective ... S T U N N I N G
-
Your model looks equally surprised ...
A nice demonstration of the inherent power of the D500 w/b, Frank.
-
Plus did I mention the little beast drives my 1.4/24G at 10 fps with reliable AF tracking?
Noone thought Nikon would ever cut that! But they did. Even with the nice price offer D500.
-
Continued to be impressed with this camera (apart from the WiFi >:( ).
High ISO lacks the blotchy character found in other models.
Here's one at ISO 32000. Processed with ACR/Photoshop. No noise reduction applied, resize only.
(Sorry about the lack of other models than Stavanger...house project dictates and restricts).
-
ISO 32000?
-
ISO 32000?
Yup!
-
ISO 32000?
It is very important to switch off the noise reduction, otherwise you get strage artefacts
-
Yup!
I read 3200 and thought crap that's noisy ....I need to retrain my analogue brain to see :)
-
Inspired by MFloyd's efforts in the D5 thread I did a color checker shot at 25600 with the D500.
The main purpose was to see how well the AWB in camera handled the mixed lighting condition. Quite well I'd say!
First image is Camera AWB, the second is white balance eye dropper tool on the white patch in ACR.
-
Sten
I agree with you regarding the noise. I find the high ISO noise less objectionable (and less intrusive) than previous cameras such as my D7100.
Thus, in my mind the question morphs from is there less noise to is the noise easier to accept. In my opinion - Yes. This weekend I shot ambient light party portraits at 14000 that were quite serviceable.
-
Inspired by MFloyd's efforts in the D5 thread I did a color checker shot at 25600 with the D500.
The main purpose was to see how well the AWB in camera handled the mixed lighting condition. Quite well I'd say!
First image is Camera AWB, the second is white balance eye dropper tool on the white patch in ACR.
Throw in 40% flourescent and you will be likewise impressed
-
I am content with the high ISO (so far). As for mixed lighting nightmare the yardstick for me will be the annual dance show in early December where the stage is filled with an incredible mix of different light sources. I haven't tested the D500 for the notorious Nikon focus error in incandescent light.
-
I am content with the high ISO (so far). As for mixed lighting nightmare the yardstick for me will be the annual dance show in early December where the stage is filled with an incredible mix of different light sources. I haven't tested the D500 for the notorious Nikon focus error in incandescent light.
you have some time to get used to the tool. I only experience inconsitencies in light metering.
-
Since theater will be my measure bar for any camera, what about iso 3200-6400 ability to work with the raw - I'm spoiled by the d750 forgiveness - and the actual noise of the shutter?
Files noise, autofocus, speed and speed again and again is all there and it looks excellent for what I do.
-
The noise is very behaved even in the fast non silent mode. But you know noise is also a matter of taste.
As told before: the files are not as resilient as the the D600 files. !BUT! If you get it right in camera you will have OOC RAW conversion .... mouth watering
-
Just went out *at midnight* and tried the high ISO setting and video capabilities of the D500 under not so optimal conditions. Of course, this being the brighter season here in the Nordic countries, but I live pretty far down south and night still is very much detectable.
This is a frame dump from a video shot with the AFS 35/1.4 G at ISO 25600. W/b set to Auto and I had two opposite competing light sources: a vast expanse of deep blue sky and a yellow-orange sodium street lamp shining directly over this thicket of flowering Japanese Rose Rosa rugosa. As this invasive species is on the National Black List, the ideal colour rendition perhaps might be all black (!), but to no avail; the D500 provided an uncannily accurate colour rendition of the flowers and foliage. This is taking automated white balance a great stride forward, in my opinion. One can rely on the functionality for once, it seems.
A pity that my favourite RAW editor, Photo Ninja, does such a lousy job with D500 NEFs, in particular for high ISO captures. I am forced to use, or rather lament, Capture NX-D, which must be the slowest conversion program ever from Nikon. The PictureCode guys do promise future support for D500 though.
-
I understand you run NX-D on Windows 10 in a virtual machine on an 8core system?
I run NX-D 64bit on native Win10 64 bit on a 16core system with 64GB RAM ... much faster than Photo Ninja
on the same system.
Could it be the bottleneck is not NX-D???
-
This is a frame dump from a video shot with the AFS 35/1.4 G at ISO 25600. W/b set to Auto and I had two opposite competing light sources: a vast expanse of deep blue sky and a yellow-orange sodium street lamp shining directly over this thicket of flowering Japanese Rose Rosa rugosa. As this invasive species is on the National Black List, the ideal colour rendition perhaps might be all black (!), but to no avail; the D500 provided an uncannily accurate colour rendition of the flowers and foliage. This is taking automated white balance a great stride forward, in my opinion. One can rely on the functionality for once, it seems.
Another convincing example!
-
"I understand you run NX-D on Windows 10 in a virtual machine on an 8core system?"
No. NX-D on a physical machine Win7, 32 GB RAM, 8core i7, all SSD-based. NX-D is horribly slow, many times slower than Photo Ninja, the latter being glacial enough. Photoshop and other software fly at super speed thus the machine itself is fully operational and there is nothing wrong with the system as such.
In fact, over the years, I have never had any installation of Nikon Capture, Capture2, or NX-d, that wasn't glacially slow. This on many different hardware configurations.
-
Since theater will be my measure bar for any camera, what about iso 3200-6400 ability to work with the raw - I'm spoiled by the d750 forgiveness - and the actual noise of the shutter?
Files noise, autofocus, speed and speed again and again is all there and it looks excellent for what I do.
The same goes for me...stage dance/theatre photography. I will investigate the 3200-8000 ISO range in this respect. The shutter is actually behaved noise wise. Don't have a D750 anymore so comparing will have to wait until/if I can get a loaner.
-
Thanks Frank and Sten for your information. Noted.
Sten, I will gladly provide d750´s nefs to compare.
-
Thanks Frank and Sten for your information. Noted.
Sten, I will gladly provide d750´s nefs to compare.
The IQ difference is in the headroom for errors
-
In preparation for stage shooting I have been playing with little dolls...
-
Sten, I can detect hardly any chrominance noise. The noise mostly looks like the luminance noise which is much less obtruding than the chrominance, looks rather like film grain and affects the sharpness less than the chrominance noise does.
Panasonic m4/3 cameras have traditionally showed similar character of noise performance.
-
I am happy to report that my D500 mates really well with my 35/1.4 Ai-S (CPU'ed). Still have to get acquainted with manual focusing this combo.
Btw, my chosen title would be: Nothing lasts forever.
-
I am happy to report that my D500 mates really well with my 35/1.4 Ai-S (CPU'ed). Still have to get acquainted with manual focusing this combo.
I have no CPU in my 35/1.4 Ai-S but it still mates well with the D500. The VF is SUPERB.
-
I asked my Nikon contacts about the inner design of the D500 and got this instructive image back. Apparently the 'plastic' is high-quality composite with carbon fibre in it. Plus the following statement issued by Nikon Europe BV
"Due to the way the mount is fixed to inner chassis and the way this is intertwined with other parts of the chassis there is maximum stability and plainness (sic; probably means 'planeness') achieved. You would really need great force and a some big lever to get this mount out of balance, not even considering to rupture it from the chassis itself."
Comforting to know, however, based on the Df experience I have had, I guess it is less difficult than the Nikon rep hopes to rip out the mount if you have an awkward fall with a 300 mm lens attached to the camera.
-
Apparently the carbon fiber reinforced thermoplastic (Sereebo developed by Teijin) is used only in the bodies of the monocoque design (D5300, 5500, 750 and 500). I'm not sure how much the carbon fiber enhance its durability against the ripping force, though.
-
"maximum stability and simplicity" ... is that nice? Yes it is!
Thank you, Bjørn
-
I asked my Nikon contacts about the inner design of the D500 and got this instructive image back. Apparently the 'plastic' is high-quality composite with carbon fibre in it. Plus the following statement issued by Nikon Europe BV
"Due to the way the mount is fixed to inner chassis and the way this is intertwined with other parts of the chassis there is maximum stability and plainness (sic; probably means 'planeness') achieved. You would really need great force and a some big lever to get this mount out of balance, not even considering to rupture it from the chassis itself."
Comforting to know, however, based on the Df experience I have had, I guess it is less difficult than the Nikon rep hopes to rip out the mount if you have an awkward fall with a 300 mm lens attached to the camera.
Goes back to what I said on p. 12, Post #170:
What was incorrectly being called mere "plastic" was in fact thermoplastic, which is actually stronger than steel, but much lighter, making it better to have in a field camera than magnesium.
-
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001531_large.jpg)
Nikon D500 | 300mm f/2.8G ED VR II | Nikon AF-S 2x Teleconverter TC-20E III (@ 900mm, 10% crop) | 1/100/ | f/8.0 | ISO 100
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001528_large.jpg)
Nikon D500 | 300mm f/2.8G ED VR II | Nikon AF-S 2x Teleconverter TC-20E III (@ 900mm, no crop) | 1/200/ | f/8.0 | ISO 1000
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001533_large.jpg)
Nikon D500 | 300mm f/2.8G ED VR II | Nikon AF-S 2x Teleconverter TC-20E III (@ 900mm, no crop) | 1/1250/ | f/7.1 | ISO 320
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001527_large.jpg)
Nikon D500 | 300mm f/2.8G ED VR II | Nikon AF-S 2x Teleconverter TC-20E III (@ 900mm, no crop) | 1/100/ | f/8.0 | ISO 2000
The D500 retains excellent image quality even with a 2X TC on it.
-
Goes back to what I said on p. 12, Post #170:
What was incorrectly being called mere "plastic" was in fact thermoplastic, which is actually stronger than steel, but much lighter, making it better to have in a field camera than magnesium.
Some types of thermoplastics are just as 'strong' as some types of metals - Not stronger than steel in anyway - Sure they can be the right solution for some applications!
But in their own kind of way, when it comes to threads even the best of thermoplastics like the ones used in the new Nikon cameras is no where near compaitible to having the threads cut or rolled in metal.
That is also why you see metal inserts in for instance Carbon bike frames ;)
-
There are tangible proofs that these new materials are weaker than the traditional ones when it comes to impacts to the camera mount. Thus while their use might improve some construction problems, they certainly create new ones.
Even the most careful of users can encounter mishaps in the field. When the choice is between having a camera being misaligned or completely broken when an accident should occur, I for one much prefer the first alternative. One can then, with some extra attention, still use the camera, whilst a broken camera with the mount ripped out is completely useless. I have experienced both scenarios over the years.
Perhaps Nikon should put steel inserts into the mount foundation of the last generation plastic/thermoplastic/carbon fibre or whatever material is used, to make them more robust? I have seen too many problems crop up with my Df cameras over the last years to believe the new material is a progress of camera construction. Sorry, but true.
The above is particularly relevant for D500 users with long lenses attached to their cameras.
-
This was the solution I suggested at some point; either using larger diameter screws with more thread area or threaded inserts of some sort,,,,
Here is an extract from the net:
Inserts (http://www.tristar-inserts.com/threaded-inserts.htm) are used to strengthen plastic parts in which screws are to be installed and removed more than once. Most inserts are made of brass, which provides long thread life as well as a solid, secure fastening base. Tri-Star's are also available in aluminum, stainless steel and free-machining steel by special order.Threaded inserts (http://www.tristar-inserts.com/threaded-inserts.htm) are commonly used to reinforce two types of plastic: thermoplastic or thermoset plastic. Thermoplastics are like wax. At usable temperatures they are solid, but at elevated temperatures they get soft and melt. In contrast, thermoset plastics have a molecularly cross-linked structure which is permanently “set” into shape during the manufacturing process.
Thermoplastic compounds are generally more resilient than thermosets and respond well to the ultrasonic or thermal installation of inserts. Thermoset compounds, however, are often brittle and less resilient than thermoplastics. They respond better to molding or post-molding cold insertion.
-
"my" solution would look different, if I was in the design dptm of Nikon
camera flanges were all bullet proof
lens flanges were made from plastic, like the cheap lenses, easy to replace and the same form factor=screw positions and thickness for all lenses
then you get std flanges, lets say green 20kg static load, grey 50kg load, yellow 75kg load and red as strong as the camera mount.
You put, depending on your job the righ flange onto your lens and have some spares in your pocket, so even after a crack, as long as the glass is not damaged you could do field repair
so going into a concert with a lot of other people around you take the soft solution, fighting with a grizzly and using the equipment as a hammer you take the hard solution and risk to damage the cam as well
-
She is a very good camera. Do not overestimate her ISO
capability or the editibility of her files.
If you behave in the ISO department and test drive her in critical
Situations ... practice ... before you use her to produce customer
files ... she will be your dear friend in the field.
MF with her ground glass is amazing. Speed and precision. Wow.
-
Thomas that's is the true Engineer solution ;D and how we do it at work ;)
-
The next firmware update: 1.01 --> 1.02
http://downloadcenter.nikonimglib.com/en/download/fw/191.html (http://downloadcenter.nikonimglib.com/en/download/fw/191.html)
Addressed an issue that sometimes caused errors with certain UHS-II SD memory cards. As we were able to confirm that these were read errors arising not in the camera but in the cards themselves, we addressed the issue with a work-around that switches temporarily to UHS-I mode when a card-side error occurs in UHS-II mode. The camera switches back to UHS-II mode when turned off and then on again or when the standby timer restarts. Card-side read errors may still occur after the update, albeit very infrequently.
-
Which cards gave those errors?
If I buy a UHS-II card for speed it will act as a UHS-I card in the D500?
-
Chris, users of Lexar UHS-II SD cards of 1000x and 2000x have reported card failures.
-
Just received mine ;D
Some test shots, still getting used to the focus system, jpegs OOC look good.
Lighter than the D300, doesn´t feel as solid in your hands, but the grip is excellent.
Have to customize it further and get more experience with the different focus modes.
-
Yes. The MB-D17 is phantastic. I like the ergonomics with the grip better than the D5.
-
That first one is magnificent Sayanda!
-
sayanda love the duck chicks.
-
Just received mine ;D
Some test shots, still getting used to the focus system, jpegs OOC look good.
Lighter than the D300, doesn´t feel as solid in your hands, but the grip is excellent.
Have to customize it further and get more experience with the different focus modes.
The first one: wow. So cute, so much optimism, so keen about the water. And very well defined long legs which seem to be subject to the focus.
-
Thanks ! They were my test subjects :D
Still getting used to the new focus modes, lots of learning to do on that department. The photos were taken with the Tamron 150-600, handheld.
-
Hi Sayanda
I am very impressed with your images. Exceptional for early test shots, keep on posting as you learn your set up.
-
I have to sing another praise for the MB-D17 with Eneloop Pro
in it. Wow. Weeks of shooting with one loading.
PLUS: the grip ist very expensive BUT the camera makes so much
more sense ergonomically. A very good investment.
2700 Euros for D500 + MB-D17. Price will come down eventually
The best camera I had till today. Easily beats the D3 in every single
aspect. I will sell the D3 if I can still get some money for her or
I will give it to a friend or to my son if they need a better camera.
-
The price of the grip is rediculous; €449,00
This is the first time I ordered a third party grip; a little over €100,00 with two batteries and loader.
I'll use the batteries with my V1. :)
-
I paid 405 Euros.
-
..... Easily beats the D3 in every single
aspect. ...
The D500 lacks the support for making audio notes attached to any frame. An extremely handy feature of the pro-calibre Nikons sorely missed from Df and the D500, to name but two models.
I used this *a lot* when shooting varies botanical subjects, or persons. The wav-file got the same name as its corresponding NEF/jpg thus silently followed when you copied files later. The better RAW converters just let the wav ride piggy-back on the NEF.
Instead we have got a silly video gizmo (except for the Df though, where sanity reigned).
-
The D500 lacks the support for making audio notes attached to any frame. An extremely handy feature of the pro-calibre Nikons sorely missed from Df and the D500, to name but two models.
I used this *a lot* when shooting varies botanical subjects, or persons. The wav-file got the same name as its corresponding NEF/jpg thus silently followed when you copied files later. The better RAW converters just let the wav ride piggy-back on the NEF.
Yes, I miss that too.
-
The D5 has the voice memo, either automatically recorded during shooting or manually activated (Fn3 button, with appropriate custom setting). This is set up in setup and custom function menus.
-
I'm not going to buy a D5 just to get the memo functionality .... But it is a bad move to delete this feature from all second-tier models. D2-, D3-, D4-, D5-series all have this capability.
-
Anything that aids the ease and the richness of documenting ones images at the time of their capture is to be encouraged, e.g. the use of GPS to geotag ones image files. I see voice memos as being as equally as important to the use of a GPS with a camera. Mileage for others may differ, but in a lab or in a studio, voice memos might be even more important than the GPS.
-
Maybe you could utilize the video function to record the situation where a batch of images were taken. The video quality can be set to the lowest for the purpose. You can keep the file as small as possible.
-
Maybe you could utilize the video function to record the situation where a batch of images were taken. The video quality can be set to the lowest for the purpose. You can keep the file as small as possible.
I was thinking about that too. Yet the nifty one-name-for-nef-jpg-wav is sure lost that way.
The who-is-who on a huge event is a very helpful feature.
-
I'm not going to buy a D5 just to get the memo functionality .... But it is a bad move to delete this feature from all second-tier models. D2-, D3-, D4-, D5-series all have this capability.
Just a reminder, that Nikon only considers the D5, D810 and D810A as being the actual professional line of their product.
-
I was thinking about that too. Yet the nifty one-name-for-nef-jpg-wav is sure lost that way.
The who-is-who on a huge event is a very helpful feature.
Yes, that's for sure. My solution is no more than the "better-than-nothing" kind of thing.
-
Just a reminder, that Nikon only considers the D5, D810 and D810A as being the actual professional line of their product.
This is Nikon's opinion on this: http://nikonpro.com/Renewal-NPS-Equipment-List.pdf
Someone help with the current list ....
-
This is Nikon USA. Maybe they have another policy. And, I should not have mentioned it, because "who really cares ?"
-
Not sure if this has appeared in a previous post.
There are now Two separate field trail reports covering the D5 and D500 on "Brad Hills Natural Art Blog".
The environment the two bodies are used in is classed as extreme, which is wet,damp, with low ambient light.
A nice read with enjoyable supporting images.
-
Not sure if this has appeared in a previous post.
There are now Two separate field trail reports covering the D5 and D500 on "Brad Hills Natural Art Blog".
The environment the two bodies are used in is classed as extreme, which is wet,damp, with low ambient light.
A nice read with enjoyable supporting images.
http://www.naturalart.ca/voice/blog.html
Very interesting. Thank you for sharing. Here is the missing link.
-
Brad seems to complain about the slightly different positions of then AF-ON and the AF point selector joystick between vertical and horizontal shooting in the D5. But the area where they reside in the vertical orientation is crowded. There is the card slot door cover, info button and yes, the microphone for the voice notes feature, closely packed together. I think Nikon did what they could. Initially I found the D5's vertical AF-ON harder to find since in the D810 vertical grip it is in a totally different place, but after the first few minutes with the camera, I have had no trouble with finding any of the controls. However this does bring out one of my points: the voice annotation feature does compete for external space in the camera. In this case Nikon put it under the thumb. I imagine it could accumulate sweat over time. Hopefully it doesn't affect function.
-
Brad seems to complain about the slightly different positions of then AF-ON and the AF point selector joystick between vertical and horizontal shooting in the D5. But the area where they reside in the vertical orientation is crowded. There is the card slot door cover, info button and yes, the microphone for the voice notes feature, closely packed together. I think Nikon did what they could. Initially I found the D5's vertical AF-ON harder to find since in the D810 vertical grip it is in a totally different place, but after the first few minutes with the camera, I have had no trouble with finding any of the controls. However this does bring out one of my points: the voice annotation feature does compete for external space in the camera. In this case Nikon put it under the thumb. I imagine it could accumulate sweat over time. Hopefully it doesn't affect function.
-
My old 17-35/2.8 AFS Nikkor is feeling the fresh welcome from D500 and delivers excellent quality with this camera.
I almost felt like having a new lens at my disposal !!
-
Yep, Bjørn. They DID change something essential with the fifth generation. Not a gradual upgrade. Substantial.
We should revisit some older designs and how they work with these cameras.
-
I've enjoyed reading the first impressions of this camera, and seeing the images it produces. Feel free to PM me with serial numbers for my database:
http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/camera.html
Please include:
- serial no
- date purchased (to nearest month)
- region (on box or warranty card)
Same goes for any other Nikon camera model purchased recently :)
-
Just a short update: I paired my D500 with the Aokatec AK-NIII and via a Holux 236 it geotags very well.
-
Just a short update: I paired my D500 with the Aokatec AK-NIII and via a Holux 236 it geotags very well.
Sten, Did you choose that Aokatec 4N unit, which requires an external GPS to feed data over bluetooth, because of it's lower power consumption? I have the AK-G one-piece units and they seem OK, but do noticeably increase the battery drain rate.
-
Sten, Did you choose that Aokatec 4N unit, which requires an external GPS to feed data over bluetooth, because of it's lower power consumption? I have the AK-G one-piece units and they seem OK, but do noticeably increase the battery drain rate.
I had the NIII from my D800/810 days. I was curious how it would work but to no fear. I have explored Aokatec's web page and their latest designs but found that my old Holux 236 is good enough for my use. Am sure the newer GPS receivers has faster fix times and for some that is crucial.
-
Bjorn,
I sold my used, beaten up 17-35 and "upgraded" by purchasing a 14-24 and, for insurance, an 18-35 and 16-35. (I shoot fix bodies). I miss my 17-35 and you're post suggests my intuition is correct. Do you own the 18-35 or 16-35? Which do you to prefer to use, together with the 17-35?
Nick
-
Have used all of these, but own only the 17-35 at present. That lens has been with me since 1999.
In my opinion, they are all good to excellent and any one could serve as the main wide-angle zoom lens. One hardly has use for all of them.
The 17-35 is the fastest, the 16-35 the slowest, and 18-35 the lightest. From my notes I see the 16-35 did perform well in IR, had a useful VR function, and a complex geometric distortion at the wider end. The latest incarnation of the 18-35 has excellent resistance to flare and ghosting and an overall pleasing image quality. The 17-35 is solid and robust, handles strong light sources with aplomb although over the years will show more flare (due to the inevitable internal dust, I assume), and has lower contrast wide open than the others. It also has the advantage to some users, myself included, of offering an aperture ring.
-
23 MB program for fixing just a language issue in SETUP appears "a little" on the massive overkill side of things.
Installed the firmware update right now, will report if anything unusual is manifested.
Most likely is that instead of patching the firmware, it's just being replaced wholesale with a new copy, so even though you have a 23MB download, the actual changes may be much smaller. Also, even if it is a patch, due to the way compilers & linkers work, a small change in code can lead to much larger differences in the resulting binary due to the separate modules linking together in a different order.
The size of the download tells very little about how much different the software is.
-
I'm not going to buy a D5 just to get the memo functionality .... But it is a bad move to delete this feature from all second-tier models. D2-, D3-, D4-, D5-series all have this capability.
Has it ever been in second tier models? In their day, these cameras were all top tier models.
-
Just received mine ;D
Some test shots, still getting used to the focus system, jpegs OOC look good.
Lighter than the D300, doesn´t feel as solid in your hands, but the grip is excellent.
Have to customize it further and get more experience with the different focus modes.
How much of an improvement in IQ do you see compared to your D300? I have a D300 that I have been very happy with except for high ISO performance. How much of an improvement in ISO performance would you say the D500 has over the D300? 1 stop, 2 stops? less than 1?
-
There are tangible proofs that these new materials are weaker than the traditional ones when it comes to impacts to the camera mount. Thus while their use might improve some construction problems, they certainly create new ones.
Even the most careful of users can encounter mishaps in the field. When the choice is between having a camera being misaligned or completely broken when an accident should occur, I for one much prefer the first alternative. One can then, with some extra attention, still use the camera, whilst a broken camera with the mount ripped out is completely useless. I have experienced both scenarios over the years.
Perhaps Nikon should put steel inserts into the mount foundation of the last generation plastic/thermoplastic/carbon fibre or whatever material is used, to make them more robust? I have seen too many problems crop up with my Df cameras over the last years to believe the new material is a progress of camera construction. Sorry, but true.
The above is particularly relevant for D500 users with long lenses attached to their cameras.
This was the solution I suggested at some point; either using larger diameter screws with more thread area or threaded inserts of some sort,,,,
Good idea. Unfortunately it would probably negate the primary motivation for using thermoplastic instead of metal, which is most likely production cost reduction. I'm sure that stamping out thermoplastic components is cheaper and faster than machining out metal parts. Adding these reinforcements would likely slow down production and increase cost to the point the advantage would be lost.
-
How much of an improvement in IQ do you see compared to your D300?
I have both the D300 and D500. Subjectively speaking, the D500 is leaps & bounds better than the D300. I do not disrespect the D300 because it has a very fine "drawing" capability at low ISO IMHO, and I loved using that camera in its day. But the increased number of pixels, the improved high-ISO capability and the better colour of the D500 should be immediately obvious. For me, the best improvement in the newest Nikon DSLRs (and other brands, too) like the D500 is the improvement in dynamic range. It handles highlights and shadows better. (Note: I make full use of the D500 in-camera ADL for shadow improvement. This requires a converter which will respect that.)
Rent a D500 and try it out!
-
How much of an improvement in IQ do you see compared to your D300?
I have both the D300 and D500. Subjectively speaking, the D500 is leaps & bounds better than the D300. I do not disrespect the D300 because it has a very fine "drawing" capability at low ISO IMHO, and I loved using that camera in its day. But the increased number of pixels, the improved high-ISO capability and the better colour of the D500 should be immediately obvious. For me, the best improvement in the newest Nikon DSLRs (and other brands, too) like the D500 is the improvement in dynamic range. It handles highlights and shadows better. (Note: I make full use of the D500 in-camera ADL for shadow improvement. This requires a converter which will respect that.)
Rent a D500 and try it out!
Thanks for the info Andrea. Do you find ADL is improved in the D500 over the D300? I use ADL on my D300, but find if I set it any higher than normal, I don't really like the results
-
The D500 has remarkably consistent colours under a wide range of lighting scenarios and can safely run at ISO say 3200 and still deliver excellent detail. Its dynamic range is several stops larger than what D300 could deliver.
Do note that the D500 apparently is set by maker default to expose scenes quite "bright" and some of the dynamic headroom might be lost that way unless the user takes corrective steps and dial in a global meter correction. I don't think my RAW software is to blame as the same tendency to overbright images occur when NEFs are brought into NX-D as well.
Eventually, longevity of any camera runs out and then it is good to know these units might have an afterlife for non-photographic purposes. Like the D1 clunker seen below, acting as a door stopper.
(D500, AFS 300/2.8, ISO 1600)
-
I love love love the Doorstopper image!
I award the Frank Price 2016 for it!
-
I have both the D300 and D500. Subjectively speaking, the D500 is leaps & bounds better than the D300.
Oh Andrea, you're not helping.
I have a trip to Mongolia planned for 2017 and my only camera is a D300.....
..... sadly funds for the trip aren't all secured yet so I'm not sure how I handle this (other than sending the kids out to work)
I have got very used to the D300 and about the only thing I've missed over the years is low light capability closer to its FX cousins
Like the D1 clunker seen below, acting as a door stopper.
Only in Bjornland ;)
-
Thanks for the info Andrea. Do you find ADL is improved in the D500 over the D300? I use ADL on my D300, but find if I set it any higher than normal, I don't really like the results
I've set a friend's D300 to Active D-Lighting of Normal. The camera is also setup for NEF + JPG fine and large. I also set -2/6 stop exposure fine tune and the standard picture control. She uploads her photos to a laptop in JPG only and I backup the NEF and take them home for post processing.
I set ADL on my D800 and D300s to Low so I can use ADL in Capture NX2 though I seldom use CNX2 now. I find ADL at settings higher than Normal is not a set and forget feature. When using more than normal ADL setting I all but always use exposure compensation, LCH Master Lightness. I may also use the Neutral or Flat Picture Control in Capture NX-D with ADL. I shoot NEF(s) in lossless compression, no JPG(s).
Others my find ADL works for them without further post processing. I don't. If it works better on the D500 in the Auto setting that would be quite a feat.
Dave
-
Colin. The low light capability of the D600 is same or better than
that of the D500. It can be had used for very cheap. Use her along
with the D500 every day. Great camera. Most bang for the buck
by several miles.
-
Colin. The low light capability of the D600 is same or better than
that of the D500.
Thanks Frank. A few years back I was almost on the point of moving to FX and D600 was on the wish list at the time.
However some of my favourite subjects are sports & wildlife and the extra magnification from the DX was a factor for me. Already my 300mm and TC14 isn't quite long enough for some things, and I couldn't have afforded longer glass as well as a change of body.
-
Unless you are planning to leave the tripod at home, there is no reason the D300 wouldnt give you pictures on par with what you were able to capture before. Without a tripod you are able to keep on shooting roughly half an hour longer, during dusk and dawn. Stitching, HDR, composites, tripod, graduated ND-filters and knowledge will give you the pictures you are able to imagine, even with the D300.
-
Thanks Frank. A few years back I was almost on the point of moving to FX and D600 was on the wish list at the time.
However some of my favourite subjects are sports & wildlife and the extra magnification from the DX was a factor for me. Already my 300mm and TC14 isn't quite long enough for some things, and I couldn't have afforded longer glass as well as a change of body.
Ah. OK. You are into tele and cropping and you need AF capability too. That is not for the D600.
She is for slow high quality big print shots and wide angle work. My 24mm is a real 24mm with her.
-
Thanks Frank, yes in an ideal world maybe I'd have both.
And thanks too Børge. I can safely say no tripod will be taken - some of this trip is being done by camel & staying in yurts. Realistically I will take the D300 and possibly just a single 18-50 zoom. We are covering a few thousand Km and I expect it to be quite knackering.
-
I do like how the D500 keep colors under control when ISO is turned up. The lack of linear read out noise is also brilliant.
-
I set ADL on my D800 and D300s to Low so I can use ADL in Capture NX2 though I seldom use CNX2 now. I find ADL at settings higher than Normal is not a set and forget feature. When using more than normal ADL setting I all but always use exposure compensation, LCH Master Lightness. I may also use the Neutral or Flat Picture Control in Capture NX-D with ADL. I shoot NEF(s) in lossless compression, no JPG(s).
Based on what my D300 user manual says, my understanding of ADL (at least for a D300) is that it has a hardware component that affects the RAW image itself and can't be fully reproduced in post-processing. Indeed, my D300 retouch menu has a D-lighting menu pick, and so did the original Capture-NX. I do recall Nikon documentation stating that D-lighting in retouch & Capture-NX can't achieve results that are as good as using Active-D lighting when you are shooting.
Of course, this is something that may have changed with newer cameras.
-
These days, I'm slowly exploring the features and image quality of my D500. I gave up on processing wiith the awful NX-D and have run the D500 NEFs through PhotoNinja instead. My version of PN (1.25) does not directly support D500, but apparently does just fine with a little help in terms of colour profiles. I have compared the output against results from the last version (1.34) that claims to support D500, and difference is frankly negligible.
Some of the lenses used with D500 produce very pleasing output. I already mentioned the old 17-35/2.8 that balances almost perfectly with the D500, and the same goes for the 20/2.8 AIS (CPU-enabled). I used the latter extensively of late.
Here is an example of the D500 combined with 20/2.8. Hand-held ISO 200, f/16, at the near limit. Subject is Cinnamon Rose Rosa majalis, a low-growing rose species native to the Nordic region and adjacent parts of Russia.
Full frame, then 100% crop. No sharpening. Not bad for a DX camera in my humble opinion, despite a possible substandard development through PN. The 20 does a good service on this camera, as it incidentally also does on the Df.
-
Thanks Frank, yes in an ideal world maybe I'd have both.
And thanks too Børge. I can safely say no tripod will be taken - some of this trip is being done by camel & staying in yurts. Realistically I will take the D300 and possibly just a single 18-50 zoom. We are covering a few thousand Km and I expect it to be quite knackering.
What a trip!
I look forward to the images.
-
Colin, the trip sounds great. What an adventure. You should check with Jacques P. He has travelled Mongolia. I am envious of your trip but not of many Kms on a Camel ;)
All the best,
Tom
-
Cheers guys. At the moment my main concern is getting myself fit enough for it. I'm not best friends with my knees currently and need to start doing more exercise.
We'll actually fly into Beijing and have a few days in mainland China before the main trips. I was surprised at being able to take several useable pictures when travelling by coach in Iceland (even some stitched images whilst travelling at normal speeds) so hope they keep their windows as clean!
But it's not all glamour - I think any vegetarians will find that the non meat options in certain places could be minimal. I believe in a complete emergency getting stranded in the desert, the last resort is to eat your four-legged transport.
Ok, thanks for your interest and back to the D500 thread. Got any new images for us with some of the other legacy lenses you've been revisiting Bjorn?
-
Cheers guys. At the moment my main concern is getting myself fit enough for it. I'm not best friends with my knees at the currently and need to start doing more exercise.
Best thing for knees are cycling I've discovered. Swimming is not bad either, but getting a stationary bike and use that while watching TV works wonders. :)
-
Colin: "back to the D500 thread. Got any new images for us with some of the other legacy lenses you've been revisiting Bjorn?"
Plenty, but I have to meter the presentations carefully so as not to overload the discussion.
Below, a stand of Ligularia przewalskii I just discovered in my neighbourhood. It is an Asian species now becoming naturalised in my country, but behaves well with no aggressive growth or invasive dispersal - so far. Shot with the old 50 mm f/1.4 K (AI- and CPU-modified, both modifications thanks to Erik).
Apart from the obvious more mellow drawing and slightly lower contrast, nothing in terms of sharpness etc. discloses this lens being more than 40 years old. Focusing still is buttery smooth.
-
Consider the 18-200mm lens for your D300 if you are contemplating a one lens solution for travelling to Mongolia.
Maybe use the 18-50mm as your backup lens?
......................................
......................................
I can safely say no tripod will be taken - some of this trip is being done by camel & staying in yurts. Realistically I will take the D300 and possibly just a single 18-50 zoom. We are covering a few thousand Km and I expect it to be quite knackering.
-
Another (not so) oldie thriving on the D500 is the 105 mm f/2 DC Nikkor. As the plane of focus shifts a lot when the DC ring is rotated, it's best to use manual focusing with this lens. A challenge easily met by the pretty crisp D500 finder.
Hay bales dot the rural landscape these days, usually come in white or black varieties, but this year a lot were pink "marshmallows" instead. Turned out the farmers purchased the special pink wrapping to support a national campaign against breast cancer. A percentage of the sales goes directly to the campaign funds.
-
I commute through about 50 miles of Rural Farming Land daily, sad to say no Pink Bale Wrap to be seen, what a opportunity missed by our
Home Counties Land Owners.
-
I knew about the pink ribbons etc. used for the cancer campaigns, but had to investigate a little about the pink bales. Turned out the supplier was sold out in a few days thus many farmers responded to the call.
-
Great shot of the social sponsoring hey balls!
I forgot to report the following: for me Snapbridge is for the bin.
It drains the battery of my Samsung Galaxy Note 2 in no time.
I guess this older phone features the wrong Bluetooth version
and will report back when I buy a new smartphone in a few years.
-
Another legacy optic tried on the D500 is the Micro-Nikkor 200 mm f/4 (AIS). Unfortunately, I found this combination less than ideal because the camera is too light weight to give proper balance to the package. An added battery grip might have solved the issue. Apart from that issue, the lens focuses easily and rapidly enough, but the optics do show their age and some repair work to remove chromatic aberrations later is required.
I have turned off all wi-fi/snapbridge/blutooth whatever feature and set the camera to 'Flight Mode' (otherwise my Foolography GPS won't work). Battery longevity is OK, but not spectacular.
-
Just so it is not thought of the British Land Owners in a untoward way, a little research has shown a £ 10000 fund raised through the purchase of Pink Bale Wrap, and many pink stickers were purchased for conventional bale wrap colours.
"All is well that ends well"
-
I actually like the Micro Nikkor 4/200 Ai-S on the D500, altough it is quite long. Counter balance is there in my case, but I use it tripod bound anyway
-
You are correct that with tripod support, the 200 Micro works much nicer than it does hand held. I was thinking of shooting butterflies and similar flittering creatures with it on a hand-held camera, but gave up as the package was unstable. This did work pretty well with cameras such as D2/D3-series though.
-
Interesting that the Norwegian farmers are also supporting the pink bale wrap / breast cancer cause - or maybe the gesture first emanated from Europe - I don't know. However these pink bale wraps are also to be seen in NZ and Australia. Thanks for posting.
Another (not so) oldie thriving on the D500 is the 105 mm f/2 DC Nikkor. As the plane of focus shifts a lot when the DC ring is rotated, it's best to use manual focusing with this lens. A challenge easily met by the pretty crisp D500 finder.
Hay bales dot the rural landscape these days, usually come in white or black varieties, but this year a lot were pink "marshmallows" instead. Turned out the farmers purchased the special pink wrapping to support a national campaign against breast cancer. A percentage of the sales goes directly to the campaign funds.
-
Below, a stand of Ligularia przewalskii I just discovered in my neighbourhood. It is an Asian species now becoming naturalised in my country, but behaves well with no aggressive growth or invasive dispersal - so far. Shot with the old 50 mm f/1.4 K (AI- and CPU-modified, both modifications thanks to Erik).
Apart from the obvious more mellow drawing and slightly lower contrast, nothing in terms of sharpness etc. discloses this lens being more than 40 years old. Focusing still is buttery smooth.
Bjørn, is this image really taken with a 50mm lens on DX body? It looks like an image of a very wide lens, though the file name tells otherwise. Perhaps the angle of the leaves creates the illusion of the steep perspective of a super-wideangle?
-
Bjørn, is this image really taken with a 50mm lens on DX body? It looks like an image of a very wide lens, though the file name tells otherwise. Perhaps the angle of the leaves creates the illusion of the steep perspective of a super-wideangle?
Yes, absolutely certain. Do remember virtually all my manual lenses are CPU-modified and hence there is no chance of mixing up focal lengths or aperture settings. This image was taken with the 50 mm f/1.4 [K] Nikkor at f/8, 1/60 sec, ISO 800. In order to get the diagnostic characters (leaf shape, black stems) into adequate focus, the camera direction was slanted a little downwards.
-
Bjørn, thanks for the details. I know your exif data are strictly under control. In hindsight, DOF is too shallow at f8.0, if a very wide lens was used...
I'm also curious why you chose specifically 50/1.4K for this particular shooting occasion. You should own some better 50s with CPU.
-
Note, there are two K 50/1.4 models: the earlier based on the older Nikkor-S.C, and a newer more compact version which later evolved into the AI, AIS and AF versions.
-
Note, there are two K 50/1.4 models: the earlier based on the older Nikkor-S.C, and a newer more compact version which later evolved into the AI, AIS and AF versions.
Roland, you mean the newer K had 6G7E optics as opposed to 5G7E one? Richard de Stoutz' website tells that both K had 5G7E optics. I think it was not until Ai that a 50/1.4 had 6G7E optics.
-
Roland: checked serial number and photo and this lens is the first 50/1.4K version (#2933xxx). "Medium long nose".
Akira: I have heaps of different 50 mm lenses. Must try all of them over time, yes?
-
Akira: I have heaps of different 50 mm lenses. Must try all of them over time, yes?
Possibly. You were expecting heavy rain or the danger of the camera rig to be submerged accidentally by then? :o :o :o
-
No, just curiosity as to the performance of a 40+ year old lens on the latest Nikon :D
-
A shot from earlier today, acquired with the 16/2.8 Fisheye-Nikkor AIS on the D500. The rear-mounted filter has been removed in order to allow some extra cm closer focus, yet the background appear reasonably well defined at the f/16 aperture setting.
Whilst the f/3.5 Fisheye is more than a tad sharper, I selected the f/2.8 because of its ability to focus closer (in particular after Erik worked his magic on it) strengthened by removal of the rear filter. The f/3.5 Fish uses an internal filter wheel thus one cannot play the same tricks on it. Also the f/2.8 is my preferred alternative for IR and IR false-colour shooting.
(16/2.8 Fisheye-Nikkor AIS, ISO 200, f/16 1/100 sec)
-
Aahh... The late summer days in the country side.. Nice scene, not "Trøndelag" nice, but that is not to be expected ;) It seems that the 16 mm performes like a champ on the D500.
-
Actually I'm a bit surprised myself. The lens is nearly 35 years old, my most used fisheye, and still operating silky smooth, like it was just retrieved form its factory box.
Its manual focusing on the D500 is positive and easy.
-
Actually I'm a bit surprised myself. The lens is nearly 35 years old, my most used fisheye, and still operating silky smooth, like it was just retrieved form its factory box.
Its manual focusing on the D500 is positive and easy.
Very nice, wow sharp too, it made me smile since it reminded me of a few images from last summer,
if you dont mind
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7680/28569570640_8648f438bc_o.jpg)
D3 14-24/2.8
-
A shot from earlier today, acquired with the 16/2.8 Fisheye-Nikkor AIS on the D500. The rear-mounted filter has been removed in order to allow some extra cm closer focus, yet the background appear reasonably well defined at the f/16 aperture setting.
Whilst the f/3.5 Fisheye is more than a tad sharper, I selected the f/2.8 because of its ability to focus closer (in particular after Erik worked his magic on it) strengthened by removal of the rear filter. The f/3.5 Fish uses an internal filter wheel thus one cannot play the same tricks on it. Also the f/2.8 is my preferred alternative for IR and IR false-colour shooting.
(16/2.8 Fisheye-Nikkor AIS, ISO 200, f/16 1/100 sec)
Why do these houses stand on stilts? Is it due to snow cover?
-
Why do these houses stand on stilts? Is it due to snow cover?
It's a variant of the traditional Norwegian stabbur, a granary or storage-house for grain, dried meat, and other supplies. Built on pillars to avoid rodents, foxes, or wolves. Such buildings are seen everywhere in the countryside on older farms, typically constructed using whole timber logs.
-
I am curious to know how D500 balance heavier lenses like 300/2.8 +conv. 1.7 /2.0, 200-500?
Handheld, without monopod.
Krister
-
I am curious to know how D500 balance heavier lenses like 300/2.8 +conv. 1.7 /2.0, 200-500?
Handheld, without monopod.
Krister
Not tried with 200-500. With the 300/2.8, it becomes as expected very front heavy and an added battery pack would be beneficial in terms of handling.
These medium to long lenses would perform better with support such as mono- or tripods, though, irrespective of what camera they are combined with.
-
Thanks, I agree in what you say about using a monopod for medium to long lenses. I have a monopod and usually use
mine with the 300/2.8 and 1.7 or 2.0 III combo. I just read the D500 thread, totally missed it, and was surprised about
yours and others members good experience with the camera. I guess you still are?
I was looking for a better camera for wildlife/birds than I own today (Df and D3x) but was only looking for an FX!
A used D4 is slightly cheaper than a D500+grip, a D810 expensive and not as fast as the D500. (got a D3x)
I use glasses as I think you do as well, how do you go along with the DX finder? Going from DX to FX years ago the
finder experience was really nice.
-
The D500 is OK and capable of delivering excellent image quality as long as ISO is kept 1600 or lower.
I wouldn't think of it as a substitute for any FX camera, though, more like an addition to the tool chest.
-
Hi Krille
There is a valuable list of comparisons between Nikon Bodies in the "D800E replaced by D4" topic in Cameras.
The D500 is compared and much of what is said about it, is beyond the usual supplied information.
For me the information is invaluable, and a valid reference to individual bodies performances.
It will be revisited when the opportunity comes to upgrade a Nikon Body in the future, I was impressed by the
options that can be considered, as to how a body can be selected for a specified use.
-
The D500 is OK and capable of delivering excellent image quality as long as ISO is kept 1600 or lower.
In the case of a D4, where would you place this upper limit on ISO for delivering excellent image quality?
-
Higher, but haven't used that model sufficient to make more than an educated guess (6400?).
For sports etc. I assume getting the picture so to speak is far more important than getting the ultimate level of detail, so acceptable ISO range is probably much higher up the ladder.
-
As an example, already the now "obsolete" D3s could, on occasion, provide quite good image quality at 25600 ISO. More likely so in daylight than at night though, so the high ISO was most useful for getting very fast shutter speeds than exploiting very dimly lit scenes. I have a feeling some of the traits are still present in today's cameras as well.
-
As an example, already the now "obsolete" D3s could, on occasion, provide quite good image quality at 25600 ISO. More likely so in daylight than at night though, so the high ISO was most useful for getting very fast shutter speeds than exploiting very dimly lit scenes. I have a feeling some of the traits are still present in today's cameras as well.
high speed film benefits from overexposure. is this also true for digital? :o :o :o
-
The situations are not directly comparable, but in a broad sense, the answer is a cautious 'yes'.
-
I find it that in natural light, the ISO can be increased higher than in artificial (low K, possibly discontinuous spectrum ) light before the image falls apart in terms of tonal and colour quality. I suspect this is because silicon photodiodes are less sensitive to blue than red and near IR light. Thus if the light is reddish, AWB increases the blue channel values to get a more neutral result, but in doing so it increases the noise of the channel that is weakest and so there is objectionable noise. In bluish light (skylight) the red channel is amplified but this is not as much of an issue as it has high sensitivity and SNR.
With the D5, I have gotten good results at up to ISO 25600 (D810: 6400) in waning daylight. However at the said ISO settings, in indoor artificial light, I've found the results "thin" and of poor quality. So I would say I prefer to stay at lower settings for indoor available light photography, or if I must, I will turn the results into black and white which reduces my objections to the noise a bit, also then there are no more colour quality issues. However, the new anti flicker mode in the D5/D500 may change this and allow shooting in flickering artificial lights when previously the results were poor or highly variable.
Sorry I have no real experience with the D500 or D4.
-
Thanks Björn and John G!
Will try to borrow the camera and try it out!
Krister
-
Prepare yourself for a scenario in which you cannot return the camera :D
Ilkka's observations of the fundamental different behaviour in daylight vs artificial light mimic my own experiences. One cannot blindly assume a given ISO range will work everywhere, and this is a spanner in the works for relying too much on Auto ISO.
-
Prepare yourself for a scenario in which you cannot return the camera :D
Looks like a paraphrase from a car company slogan some 15 years ago!! ;D
" Huyndai, prepare to want one"
-
In the case of a D4, where would you place this upper limit on ISO for delivering excellent image quality?
I have printed ISO 25600 from the Nikon Df which have the D4 sensor. These were taken in low light around sunset. No problem. I have also printed images from the D3s and D4s up to 12800 ISO and never noticed problems. The biggest problem however is light conditions where the photons are scattered and randomly distributed. Night photography is a typical example. If you take successive images you will notice that the noise distribution are irregular and almost independent of exposure. Therefore one must take several pictures of one scene to make sure that you have a distribution of noise that doesn't affect the important areas of the image. There is no sensor built, or is ever going to be built to resolve this this limitation. Sensor technology are able to enhance a signal, but not to create light. Smaller area gather less light than a larger area, just as a wider bucket will collect more raindrops than a more narrow one, during a rain shower.
-
Old lenses like the D500. The 15 mm f/3.5 Nikkor AIS is no exception.
From today's collection;
-
For sports etc. I assume getting the picture so to speak is far more important than getting the ultimate level of detail, so acceptable ISO range is probably much higher up the ladder.
Yup, I'm always a bit upset when an image I am particularly happy with is not at all popular and a quick grab of action , that is basically a blown shot, is very popular . Sorry to hear that my D3S is "obsolete" but for the moment I'll just have to make do with it , the D750 and gripped D700. Still thinking about the D500 but funds being pulled in several directions including a 105 f1.4 :) . For newsprint and the NET high MP doesn't get me a lot.
-
Old lenses like the D500.
From today's collection;
So far that's my finding too (apart from my 24/2.8Ai-S...but I never liked that lens anyway so it matters not).
Ad the picture: A wee bit of Viagra ought to make the cone more potent...
-
I am curious to know how D500 balance heavier lenses like, 200-500?
Handheld, without monopod. Krister
I caried the 200-500/5.6 through Scotland NG meeting. See this thread for shiploads of examples. Optical performance, AF and VR are great, also ask user "Chris Dees" who works the same combination.
The ungripped D500 is a tail for the dog 200-500, so I took the tripod collar -- which is actually quite usable -- as a carrying grip.
For me the combination was to heavy for days of walking, although a lot of fun.
I tried it with a monopod. Was not helpful in many cases, so I skipped the monopod after a while.
Now I have the grip which makes the D500 a much better camera ergonomically but I gave back the 200-500/5.6 and aquired the 4/300PF instead.
Frankly I have much more fun with that combination: 1.5 kilo Camera plus 750 grams of lens is a wonderful package for a whole day of shooting, whereas the 2.3 klios of the 200-500 does not balance well with the 900 gramms of the D500 IMO.
CAVEAT: Because the front of cameras like the D810 and D500 is made of some plastic compound you should take care of the joint between heavy lenses and these bodies D3/D4/D5 are of more solid build.
-
With heavy lenses such as the 200-500/5.6, the lens should never be hung from the body; the lens itself should be always supported. This is stated in the manual as well.
Personally I would love to have a 200-500 with an internal zoom mechanism, so that it would be easy and quick to adjust framing on an approaching subject. With the current version, I found the zoom to be difficult to use hand held because of its stiffness and long throw. On a monopod or tripod, it was easier but still slow. I tried the zoom on the 150-600 Sigma Contemporary and it was similar in this respect. I believe making the 200-500 an internal zoom might make it a bit larger and heavier but it would be more useful for action than the current implementation. However, hand-holding might be more difficult if the weight is increased. For my arms it is not really hand-holdable in its present form; I got along with the lens better with a monopod or tripod; more precise compositions and less chance of blur. The 200-400/4 is internal zoom but has less range. I guess it is difficult to design a long lens that will please everyone. ;)
-
Ilkka, a designer of Sigma said in an interview that you can use their "Sports" version of 150-600 zoom as a push-pull one: you can grab the inner barrel directly to zoom in and out quickly, which is not recommended for the "Contemporary" version or any other zooms of this kind.
-
Ilkka, a designer of Sigma said in an interview that you can use their "Sports" version of 150-600 zoom as a push-pull one: you can grab the inner barrel directly to zoom in and out quickly, which is not recommended for the "Contemporary" version or any other zooms of this kind.
This is one reason I decided in favour of the 150-600 sports. You can turn the zoom ring as well as push-pull.
9 out of 10 I use the push-pull as it is much faster.
-
First experience with a 'sudden death' of my D500. Camera just abruptly locked up, no response to any controls or buttons. Lens off, then on, didn't bring the camera back to life. A different lens, no change. Finally I pulled the battery out for 30 secs then reinserted and revival was immediate.
Not the faintest idea of how this came about. I was doing extreme photomacrography and had my studio flashes running (connected via the camera's PC flash port). At the time of the incident I had shot almost 100 frames with no issues whatsoever.
-
How high is the synch voltage of your studio flash? If it is high enough to cause some spark between the contacts on the shutter curtain, it may cause the malfunction of the internal computer...
-
Don't know, as I usually work by Pocket Wizards. The session was impromptu so didn't bother getting the Pocket Wizards, though.
I have shot many thousands of frames with various Nikons (and Panasonics, Sony, Fuji) over the years using an ordinary synch cable, no problem with any make or model before.
The studio units are Broncolor (Minicom C80).
-
First experience with a 'sudden death' of my D500. Camera just abruptly locked up, no response to any controls or buttons. Lens off, then on, didn't bring the camera back to life. A different lens, no change. Finally I pulled the battery out for 30 secs then reinserted and revival was immediate.
I had that in Scotland 3 to 4 times & I am pretty sure it is a battery issue.
When I read about the battery issue I exchanged all of the faulty batteries. Now I am running on the MB-D17 (8xEneloop Prp / 2500) most of the time. Never happened again, although I missed to load the firware update till today.
-
The battery was the newest type. I have replaced all the older ones.
-
There is one known way that the D500 locked up that is now solved with Firmware version 1.10
http://downloadcenter.nikonimglib.com/en/download/fw/198.html (http://downloadcenter.nikonimglib.com/en/download/fw/198.html)
-
Thanks for the heads-up. My D500 had 1.02. I read the change log for 1.10 and didn't notice anything of importance to make me update the firmware. Obviously Nikon is not informing openly on every issue the new firmware version is supposed to fix ...
Downloading 1.10 as I write this.
-
updating. update does not accept the mb-d17 as a power source!
very slow procedure, even from the XQD-Card. Slowest FW-update I have experienced so far
-
Maybe there is a contact problem with the grip? Could you try taking it off and putting it back on, to see if that fixes the problem? Just a thought. Or, is it only during the update process that the grip battery is not accepted?
-
Maybe there is a contact problem with the grip? Could you try taking it off and putting it back on, to see if that fixes the problem? Just a thought. Or, is it only during the update process that the grip battery is not accepted?
Only during the upgrade process. I shot 8 hours of heavy Live View Mode on Wendesday with the grip.
There is an error message that says: Only Nikon LiIon batteries are accepted. I have eneloops in the grip.
-
Hi
I just got my D500.
Just had to try the high ISO, in LR it looks very noisy, but in NX-D the 3200 ISO look acceptable to very good.
Any suggestions on how to use LR, or is it not the route to to go?
I can remove the noise in LR, but have to do manually, maybe just me not knowing enough abot LR, as I have used Aperture for the last 6 years.
Br Bent
-
First, are you shooting in JPEG or NEF ? If you are shooting in NEF, none of the parameters (NR, distorsion, chromatic aberration, etc) set in the camera (long exposure NR excepted) will be incorporated and have to be set separately and post-processed in LR (contrary to NX-D). I strongly suggest to read the Lr manuals and view the numerous tutorials. As a hint, I suggest to set, as a first trial, the Lr NR parameters as follows. luminance: 50, detail: 50, contrast:0; color:25; detail: 50, smoothing: 50 (translation may vary; as I have my Lr set up in french)
-
Obviously Nikon is not informing openly on every issue the new firmware version is supposed to fix ...
Ain't that the truth.
-
Only during the upgrade process. I shot 8 hours of heavy Live View Mode on Wendesday with the grip.
There is an error message that says: Only Nikon LiIon batteries are accepted. I have eneloops in the grip.
Although I have the Meike grip I can run my camera well when I have either one or two (one in the grip) EN-EL15 (20 type) batteries. As soon as I put AA cells in the grip the camera locks up (Err).
-
MF, many thanks. I've been using PS CC but will go back to LR since I want to use Lens Tagger for the Sony and adapted lenses.
Finally decided to order the D500 and both of my dealers are out of stock , good prices but that is no help.
Tom
-
First, are you shooting in JPEG or NEF ? If you are shooting in NEF, none of the parameters (NR, distorsion, chromatic aberration, etc) set in the camera (long exposure NR excepted) will be incorporated and have to be set separately and post-processed in LR (contrary to NX-D). I strongly suggest to read the Lr manuals and view the numerous tutorials. As a hint, I suggest to set, as a first trial, the Lr NR parameters as follows. luminance: 50, detail: 50, contrast:0; color:25; detail: 50, smoothing: 50 (translation may vary; as I have my Lr set up in french)
Thank you MFloyd, I will look at the tutorials, to see if I can find a batch process to run while importing the files, so I can keep my workflow in LR
-
Ben, there is a batch process foreseen at the import of your pictures into Lr. I'm using it to proces generic post production items (such as lens correction, NR) and incorporate key words and copyright.
-
I will try that, because the quality in NX-D gives me hope for some good high ISO pictures.
-
Thanks for helping with the LR noise issue, I think it is under control now :)
But I got a new question regarding the buses of a smartphone for geotagging.
I have managed to get a location on one picture, but had to keep the camera "active" for quite a while for this to happen, have anybody experience with this?
Br Bent
-
That problem probably relates to the GPS receiver (phone?) not the camera as such. Any GPS-capable camera simply records whatever NEMEA-compatible data that arrive on the designated port and can be decoded into latitude and longitude.
I use a Foolography passive module for my D500. This tiny module operates with Blutooth technology and once paired to a suitable GPS-gathering unit, simply receives the actual data without further user intervention and injects the geospatial data to the current image being taken.
-
I have finally accepted the D500 as a capable camera ;) Tried it a few days and it seem to perform quite well. The AF is up to any task and my camera have not seem to have had any need for fine tuning for any lens tested yet. I`m not to sure about the WB and colors yet, so the jury is still out on that one. One thing I really like is the dampened sound from the shutter. Really pleasant. The camera is light and does not balance well with some of the longer lenses. These are just first impressions and some time might be needed to "grow" into the user interface.
-
How does the image quality of the D500 compare to a D800, say up to ISO 3200, all other differences being ignored?
DXO rate the D800 sensor higher, but how does it compare in practice?
I know there is a lot of difference in auto focus, frame rate, buffer, field of view etc, but if one ignore that for this comparison.
-
I had the D800E, and compared with the D500 I would say the "real world" experience are in D500`s favor, at least when there is available light (dusk to dawn, high ISO to get faster shutter speed) The downsizing process of the D800 file gets rid of some noise but the there might be some improved signal processing that makes up for the difference in D500 favor. Notice that I haven't compared the RAW-file development from both cameras in Nikons own software, only LR and PS. Basically, my experience is "gut feeling", whatever that might account for.
-
The D500 AWB is actually very good, even in incandescent lit conditions. I no longer own a D8xx series camera so cannot compare high Iso performance but I've just "researched" the OOC jpeg vs. raw at high (2000-3000) ISO range and am very impressed by the in EXPEED 5 NR processing.
-
Automatic WB is very good with the D500, but so is the Df.
As to the balance with certain lenses, D500 gets partially into the same kind of trouble as for Df, viz. front-heavy lenses do not handle very well. 'Partially' because D500 functions better with AFS lenses whilst Df invites manual lenses to be attached to it.
-
And I like that dog from another realm a lot.
-
Its the devil in disguise ;) Like the D500..
-
I've had the D500 for a week but have not had much opportunity to use it for Birds/Soccer. My first impressions are very good. Taking some time to get it set up they way I want it but that will come. Next thing is to check out the fine tuning on my most used lenses. I am having a hard time checking the speed of acquisition vs the gripped D300s, D3S and D500 since when they were my primary action cameras I was faster, younger and healthier. The D750 is with Nikon so cannot shoot head to head at the moment. So far I've not found anything to complain about and love the increased ISO range for what, and how, I shoot :)
This was a quick draw shot in the bright , harsh sun. D500, 300 2.8 vr I w/tc1.4II at f5,1/2500, ISO 640, center weighted metering, M-mode, auto WB and ISO(normal) . Really looking forward to my first soccer match but hope to have it set up for ooc jpegs before that happens, trying to get it right using NEF in CC PS 2015 is taking time. The second image is at longer distance ;) but both heavy crops . I kept moving the shutter speed up and wound up shooting most at 1/4000 :)
-
Nice photos, but either you didn't nail the right sensor to focus or you have front focus.
Can you please check where were the focus sensor?
-
Automatic WB is very good with the D500, but so is the Df.
As to the balance with certain lenses, D500 gets partially into the same kind of trouble as for Df, viz. front-heavy lenses do not handle very well. 'Partially' because D500 functions better with AFS lenses whilst Df invites manual lenses to be attached to it.
Attaching an MB-D17 filled with NiMH AA batteries helps resolve this issue no?
-
Attaching an MB-D17 filled with NiMH AA batteries helps resolve this issue no?
So do switching to D4s or D5 .... In my opinion, D500 functions (in terms of handling) best with not too longish lenses if it is used hand held. Thus it combined very well with the new 70-200 FL E.
-
I tried my old AIS 50mm 1.4 today for portraits, but had problems getting a sharp image, until I discovered that I have a "back-focus" issue, both using the finders focus indicator, and as well by judging by the OVF screen. I thought that this type of problems was related to AF lenses only. The 50mm if focused on the tip of the nose would render the lip sharp. (So it did focus approx 1 cm further away than I wanted)
Any having seen this on D500 or other models ex. Df?
Br Bent
-
No, never had that issue. However, one has to be very careful about adjusting the finder dioptre for optimal accuracy. I do this several times per day as in my experience, eyesight characteristics fluctuate quite a lot over time.
-
Pedro, probably the did not nail is the answer but will have to check all lenses. I'm a single parent at the moment so that is on my "to do" list when I have some time. I uploaded these with Bridge so even though they are on ViewNX I did not get the focus point (note to check camera settings) . Still have not seen the Migrant birds yet so have not taken the 500vr out, hopefully I will work on the fine tuning when my wife returns.
Some Raptors have shown up and they are also waiting for the influx of birds ;) > The Lake/Pond is in a very sorry state so I do not think I will see any Osprey or Sea Eagles taking fish :(
Cheers,
Tom
-
I tried my old AIS 50mm 1.4 today for portraits...
I found I was better at focusing my 50/1.2 AIS than I was at holding focus. At f/1.2 the DoF is so shallow at a focus distance of 2 meter that slight body sway would blow the focus. If I braced myself against something solid I might achieve good focus about 3 out of 4 shots. Now if this were a free standing person as a subject the success could easily drop.
It probably has been suggested but checking focus from a tripod, optical viewfinder v. live view is probably a good idea.
The camera might be out of spec but if it were me and my camera I'd doubt myself first.
Best,
Dave Hartman
-
It probably has been suggested but checking focus from a tripod, optical viewfinder v. live view is probably a good idea.
The camera might be out of spec but if it were me and my camera I'd doubt myself first.
Best,
Dave Hartman
Thanks I will test with a tripod. Both me and the person I photographed was free standing
Br Bent
-
D500 with 135 f2 Zeiss APO Sonnar, challenging to focus
Admin comment: No need to upload the same image three times ...
-
Nikon D500 + Nikkor AF-S 300mm f/2.8VR II + Nikkor AF-S 2x TC-20E III
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001941_large.jpg)
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001940_large.jpg)
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001942_large.jpg)
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001943_large.jpg)
-
Nikon D500 + Voigtländer 125mm f/2.5 APO-Lanthar Macro
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001935_large.jpg)
-
#404 WOW WOW WOW. superb style and green tones!
-
#404 WOW WOW WOW. superb style and green tones!
Nikon D500 + Voigtländer 125mm f/2.5 APO-Lanthar Macro
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001935_large.jpg)
Thank you.
The real amazing thing is that she is still alive ... as of today :o
Typically, mantids here die by October/November, but she is still kicking.
I found (and photographed) her in my mother's garden on 11/24 ... obviously pregnant ... but the approaching weekend indicated cold rains and 40-50° temperatures. After taking this photo on the 24th, I feared for her safety and intervened, bringing her indoors to warm temperatures to ensure her success at delivering her impending eggs.
She delivered a week ago and I have since placed her ootheca outdoors in my parents' yard where I found her.
In the meantime, this elderly gal is still doing fine, as of 12/8, defying all odds and still eating when I feed her :D
Jack
-
She would also be a great addition to the color of life thread, Jack
-
Great image Jack
Wonderful subject (I've only ever seen a Mantis once, in Greece)
And fascinating backstory. Please post pictures of the children :)
-
She would also be a great addition to the color of life thread, Jack
Hi. Where is that?
-
Great image Jack
Wonderful subject (I've only ever seen a Mantis once, in Greece)
And fascinating backstory. Please post pictures of the children :)
Really?
There are many different strains in Florida (where I used to live) and I think about 3 here in California: http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/JohnKoerner/861
I have placed this one's eggs eggs, back outside so they can hatch naturally next spring.
Been working a ton of hours, so haven't had much time for photography, but I hope to capture a video of the mantid nymphs emerging next spring.
They typically die-off in November, even if kept indoors ... but this ol' gal is still alert, and still feeding, as of today :D
-
Hi. Where is that?
http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?topic=3942.45
-
Ok, time for some real situation high ISO needs: Here at ISO 20.000, 1/500s, f/2.8 and ISO 10.000, 1/500s, f/2.8.
-
Sten, how was your overall experience with the d500 at the theater? There is an offer here for a brand new one for 1900€...
-
Sten, how was your overall experience with the d500 at the theater? There is an offer here for a brand new one for 1900€...
Apart from the high ISO capability which still is lagging compared to FX the real advantage is the D500's speed (changing ISO, AF acquisition time and accuracy and FPS). This comes in really handy when wanting to capture a dancer in the desired pose. Arms and legs move so fast that trying to nail this with single frames is very challenging. So I can live with more grainy images.
I also brought a D3S but it fell short wrt. AF performance so I barely used it. Now, the Df was used quite a lot for images taking in the whole stage. For this I used the Tamron 85/1.8VC and a Nikkor 70-200/2.8 VRII mostly.
-
Apart from the high ISO capability which still is lagging compared to FX the real advantage is the D500's speed (changing ISO, AF acquisition time and accuracy and FPS). This comes in really handy when wanting to capture a dancer in the desired pose. Arms and legs move so fast that trying to nail this with single frames is very challenging. So I can live with more grainy images.
I also brought a D3S but it fell short wrt. AF performance so I barely used it. Now, the Df was used quite a lot for images taking in the whole stage. For this I used the Tamron 85/1.8VC and a Nikkor 70-200/2.8 VRII mostly.
A d750 with a 80-200 2.8 ED is my weapon of choice for most of my stage work as of today. There is a gripped d700 for fast action. The idea is to replace the later with a d500 and the lens with either a 70-200 vrII or the new version. I feel it is time for an upgrade. That you brought a D3S and barely use it is a very strong point for me.
-
A d750 with a 80-200 2.8 ED is my weapon of choice for most of my stage work as of today. There is a gripped d700 for fast action. The idea is to replace the later with a d500 and the lens with either a 70-200 vrII or the new version. I feel it is time for an upgrade. That you brought a D3S and barely use it is a very strong point for me.
I used to shoot with a D750 but the AF sensor coverage was on the small side. The D750 rules the ISO scale though. The D3S just felt old in comparison. I also emply LV to prefocus and that's another area where newer tech is better. I didn't get the chance to test out the Fujifilm X-T2 but that would certainly been interesting. The other thing that is nice with the D500 is the bright and large viewfinder. Another and perhaps interesting point is that I made better use of the Sigma 50-150/2.8OS than the 70-200 Nikkor. The near 20mm did make a difference...more so than the missing 50mm at the long end.
But again, the 10fps in the D500 is just really nice to have.
-
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001950_large.jpg)
Nikon D500 + 300mm f/2.8 VR II + 2x TCIII
ISO 4000, 1/8 shutter
The above shot looks like it was taken in broad daylight ... but that is the power of the D500 ... the image was actually taken in almost pitch-black conditions (no flash).
To illustrate the conditions, the image below was taken before the above, and attempted with a Nikon SB-700 AF Speedlight at 1/125 shutter.
I chose to take the top photo, with no flash, to remove any eye-reflection, as well as to push the camera to its limits. It did not disappoint.
-
phantastic shot, John. 1/8 is not so easy with a 300mm lens
-
phantastic shot, John. 1/8 is not so easy with a 300mm lens
It was on a tripod of course :)
I would have had even better results with a remote switch. I take a lot of natural light macros at very slow shutters (with stationary subjects), so I figured I would try on this nocturnal bird.
I was only able to do this because owls "sit still" long enough to allow for a slow shutter like that :D
Cheers,
-
The most rigorous test of a camera body (or lens) is how well it survives trauma, especially impacts from being dropped and similar accidents. Height and total mass of the equipment compound the damage inflicted on impact. So does the nature of the substrate i.e. terra firma. My D500 - 300 f2.8G VRII unit was not properly tightened on to the arca-swiss mount on the Sirui monopod. The entire combo of lens and camera fell off my shoulder and hit hard granitic clay. As those who've had similar disasters, the event happens too damned quickly to grab anything e.g. a sling! All of a sudden the "loss" of Weight off one's shoulder then the bang! Reminds me somewhat of being shot at unexpectantly !!
This accident was caused by my own stupity in the rushed assembly of lens to the LS10 monopod head. The Arca-swiss plate coupling was still loose, and I also did not clip on the safety loop (see photos below). 2 stupid mistakes I will not make again. The 3rd-party Meike grip fitted to the D500 is polycarbonate. It seemed to absorb most of the impact but the LCD screen is well and truly buggered. And the +ve arm of the LCD exposure meter is not showing in (either viewfinder and anterior lcd)... ominous symptom
Nevertheless, the camera still fires in S, and both Continuous modes. AF works. Oh, yes and i'm especially relieved to report the lens survived fine, given the grip and D500 bearing the brunt of the impact! One take home lesson is the Mg/polycarbonate chassis can take some abuse, but I'm definitely not planning anymore trials. The D500 is with Nikon for post-mortem and damage assessment.... At very least bracing mysefl for the cost of a replacement LCD....+++??!! and the Labour
The photos below show the snaplink clipping system I normally use to link the tripod/monopod handsling to lens carry-loop. The red button on the Sirui MP-20 depresses the brass stud that is the spring-loaded safety/anti-slip mechanism to stop the loose plate slipping forward or back. This Sirui system is far, far superior to the anchor (anti-slide) studs fitted to some tripod feet; It's tricky to seat the arca-swiss plate fully from above on the plate: the grub screws on these Jobu tripod feet means one has to loosen the tripod head wide enough to put the foot on from above. And then "tightening" the arca-swiss coupling can still leave the whole assembly loose. These studs give a false - actually dangerous - sense of security. My usual modus operandi is to slide the arca-swiss plate screwed under the lens foot (or camera body) horizontally into the tripod head, which is slightly loosened & then tighten the side belt - tight. My first mitigation has been to remove these studs supplied on the Jobu 300/2.8 Foot - since consigned them to scrap.
kind regards
woody
-
Stupid mistakes happen. We can only see to them not happen too often.
-
Woody, I feel your pain. I just killed my D750 with an unplanned dip in a muddy Pond. In my defence I was on a heavy dose of medications , post hospital, and never should have been out shooting. Cost of repair Rs 68K (over $1,000) . Nikon offered me a new one at a knockdown price but I've decided to wait and see what Nikon brings out next. I have too many cameras but the D750 is very nice and paired well with the D500. I've carried the 500vr over the shoulder attached to tripod a few times but never far and without incident. Sometimes it is just the angle which the camera hit. Fingers crossed for quick, reasonable trip to Nikon.
All the best,
-
Woody and Tom, sorry about your mishap. Hope your financial and mental pain will be kept to the minimum.
My D750 and AF-S 50/1.8G combo dropped from the 50cm stool to the wooden floor. Fortunately the plastic lens hood absorbed the most of the shock. I brought the combo to Nikon service next day, and it turned out to be totally undamaged. The alignment of the optical axis remained intact. Of course, it has operated flawlessly since then. It didn't take even any scratches. I guess the new monocoque construction and its "floating" mirror box helped, too.
-
Akira, a drop to the soft bank would have been much better than the camera and I going into the water. A dunking normally means death to most cameras even if only for a few seconds >:(
Glad your drop did no damage. If I do not like new offerings from Nikon I can see myself taking Nikon's offer for another D750 or even a super cheap D610. Hoping for a new D7xx with new sensor and the AF of the D5/D500 and 1/8000. I can live with less fps and just a reasonable buffer but Nikon seems to always leave something out.
With the 42MP Sony, but horrendous write times, I am not too bothered but still prefer my Nikons.
All the best,
tom
-
Hi Chambesi
. I feel your bad luck, not your stupid mistake.
The single clamp lens foot retainers are a accident waiting to happen, when it does, it is bad luck not stupidity.
Why the mounting base plate cant have the middle third as a clamp and the front and rear thirds of the clamp, be a
Permanent part of the base plate, where you would need to slide the lens foot into it, with a spring loaded pin to restrict the sliding operation of the foot. Keeping it secure if you over look any of the set up method.
This is a system that would safeguard many a equipment from serious damage, when a simple user error occurs.
I had a in depth conversation over the Xmas period, on this subject, as I am selecting a lens mounting system, and
Equipment security as well as performance are on my mind.
The person I was talking to, had another bad luck experience. They watched the cantilever lens mount break off on a Gimbal with a New Purchased 600mm f4 mounted on it . Luckily the tripod was set low, and long grass was under the set up, so no damage happened.
-
I´m sorry to hear that Chambesi! Hope you get it fixed at a minor cost. Wish you the best of luck!
-
I have just being in Norway "shooting" the Danish XC skiing championship.
I used both my old D700 and my new D500.
I had to adjust exposure on nearly all my images taken with the D500 +0,3 to +0,7. Setting the camera to overexpose +0,7 solved the problem, but in the past I never had to do this on my digital cameras (D200, D300s).
Do I have a problem/error on this particular camera or have others observed the same.
The 2 pictures shows the difference.
-
Was this with matrix metering?
-
Was this with matrix metering?
Yes on both cameras, have used this during the last 8 years when photographing the XC championship
-
I'm a little surprised as my D500 doesn't return such results. Perhaps I haven't pushed it enough? Matrix metering ought to understand there is snow in the scene. The earliest version way back in time still needed a helping hand for snow scenes, but the metering systems have improved and are more clever now.
However, it is very easy to relocate the +- compensation on the D500 without intending to do so.
Added: just checked with my D500 and the 300PF. The camera definitively underexposes when snow comprises a major part of the frame.
-
I think this is one of the drawbacks of new "improved" metering....trying to revert to 18% grey.
-
I'm a little surprised as my D500 doesn't return such results. Perhaps I haven't pushed it enough? Matrix metering ought to understand there is snow in the scene. The earliest version way back in time still needed a helping hand for snow scenes, but the metering systems have improved and are more clever now.
However, it is very easy to relocate the +- compensation on the D500 without intending to do so.
Added: just checked with my D500 and the 300PF. The camera definitively underexposes when snow comprises a major part of the frame.
Hmm, it looks like some of you make use of the fine tune exposure...?
May I ask what amount you've been using for your models? Both with matrix and spot? Advice/experience for the D4s?
-
for snow, I always +1 or even +2 :o :o :o
there is definitely something in the snow that is fooling the meter ::)
-
for snow, I always +1 or even +2 :o :o :o
there is definitely something in the snow that is fooling the meter ::)
Exposure compensation is one thing, I'm wondering about using the "Fine tune optimal exposure" setting permanent?
-
Fine-tune always around 1/6EV, mostly in the - direction.Only for matrix. I've done so with all models offering this feature.
-
Fine-tune always around 1/6EV, mostly in the - direction.Only for matrix. I've done so with all models offering this feature.
Thanks Bjørn, I'll give - 1/6EV a try 👍.
-
Matrix metering has had the tendency of paying too much attention to the shadows, thus letting down the highlights. That's OK for negative film, but not digital.
-
Matrix metering has had the tendency of paying too much attention to the shadows, thus letting down the highlights. That's OK for negative film, but not digital.
Absolutely.
To make things more interesting, I found out that the D500 has a special metering mode "Highlight-weighted: Available with type G, E and D lenses" that will definitely give dark pictures in the snow.
The D500 is the first camera I have had that has this mode. I was rather flustered when I accidentally selected that mode and thought my brand new camera was broken :P
-
Thanks for all the replies.
I did not use the fine tune setting, but was thinking abut doing so.
And the the compensation was not altered from 0.
We have for a change some snow here in Copenhagen, so I did a test like Bjørn.
I have 3 cameras, D700, D800 and the D500, using the same 24-70 F2.8 set on f5.6 and 24 mm on all three cameras, and then a picture of my garden.
From the three picture I can see that already the D800 has some change to the exposure, all three was in matrix metering.
The crops are made from RAW files, and exposure has not been changed in Lightroom.
The +1 compensation seems a bit too much for thise pictures, in Lightroom a +0,5 was enough, but LR's automatic mode did a +1 for the D700 and +1.65 for the others, this however changed the colour of the D800 NEF file to be very reddish and not natural.
-
One really need to pay attention to where the focus point is located, as that is used for weighing the exposure (and sometimes to different degrees between camera models).
My experience is that low contrast (with respect to the snow) scenes like this with flat lighting are the ones most likely to trigger underexposure.
-
One really need to pay attention to where the focus point is located, as that is used for weighing the exposure (and sometimes to different degrees between camera models).
My experience is that low contrast (with respect to the snow) scenes like this with flat lighting are the ones most likely to trigger underexposure.
This may explain some of my underexposed pictures, as we had overcast weather in Norway and today in Copenhagen.
I focused on the same bush on all three pictures with the center point. But anyway Nikon seems to have changes the metering system since the D700, as also the D800 the underexposure as the D500.
I will have to lear how to master this, I was just checking it might be a problem with my sample.
-
SOOC Jpeg (Neutral Sharpness 3) D500 Matrix +2/3 stop exposure bias. Another 1/3 might have been good.
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/325/32272882692_3e29b2e11c_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/RaQXDW) (https://flic.kr/p/RaQXDW)
Click to view on Flickr where full EXIF is available. User right and left arrows while on Flickr to see similar images on the same day.
-
One really need to pay attention to where the focus point is located, as that is used for weighing the exposure (and sometimes to different degrees between camera models).
For sure, when I moved from the D700 to the D800 I noticed a big shift in regards focus point location and the exposure when using matrix metering. If the D800 focus point was placed on a shadow area of the scene it would expose much more for the shadow than the entire scene, counterintuitive I thought. The D700 did not behave that way. Took some getting used to.
-
for snow, I always +1 or even +2 :o :o :o
there is definitely something in the snow that is fooling the meter ::)
**Snow is white, well usually. With most meters you have to increase the exposer. For the old zone system you'd place snow on zone VI to VIII when using a 1/21 degree spot meter. It would be a judgement call. Would +2.33 stops be typical? It been a long time. Snow can sparkle and fool a meter even more.
Dave Hartman
Sometimes snow is yellow.** :)
-
SOOC Jpeg (Neutral Sharpness 3) D500 Matrix +2/3 stop exposure bias. Another 1/3 might have been good.
Nice to see snow be used for fun :)
The exposure setting is close to what I had to change a lot of my pictures with in LR, to get the snow the right colour, white ;)
-
However the reflected light from snow can appear blue,,, ;)
-
**Snow is white, well usually. With most meters you have to increase the exposer. For the old zone system you'd place snow on zone VI to VIII when using a 1/21 degree spot meter. It would be a judgement call. Would +2.33 stops be typical? It been a long time. Snow can sparkle and fool a meter even more.
Dave Hartman
Sometimes snow is yellow.** :)
White is probably the most difficult colour for an exposure meter to understand, even if it is supposed to understand colour. How is a colour meter to differentiate white from overefpised gray? It can't, so even today the photographer needs to help the computer in the camera. It's still man over machine.
I come from the old Olympus OM system as my first camera system, where cameras like OM-4(Ti), OM-3(Ti) and the OM-2 Spot Program, all offered spot metering, and even multi spot for the OM-3/4 (Ti) series. This was a great way of learning to judge exposure, and the Zone system made a lot of sense. Olympus even did a partial implementation with Highlight (+2.7 EV) and Shadow (-2 EV) exposure modes.
You would typically do a spot reading of a white surface and push the Highlight button to achieve a correct exposure.
-
For sure, when I moved from the D700 to the D800 I noticed a big shift in regards focus point location and the exposure when using matrix metering. If the D800 focus point was placed on a shadow area of the scene it would expose much more for the shadow than the entire scene, counterintuitive I thought. The D700 did not behave that way. Took some getting used to.
This is intuitive to me, since the point you focus on is probably the important part of the image. It's even a desired behaviour for those of us who "grew up" with Olympus OM with spot metering, which I did.
-
This is intuitive to me, since the point you focus on is probably the important part of the image. It's even a desired behaviour for those of us who "grew up" with Olympus OM with spot metering, which I did.
This doesn't explain at least to me why I get the difference, as the focus point always is on the skier, even the skier looks underexposed :o
-
This doesn't explain at least to me why I get the difference, as the focus point always is on the skier, even the skier looks underexposed :o
But you still used the matrix mode, right? Then it will still take the rest of the motif into consideration, and the rest is very different from the skier. Spot metering would be on the skier and nothing else. :)
-
But you still used the matrix mode, right? Then it will still take the rest of the motif into consideration, and the rest is very different from the skier. Spot metering would be on the skier and nothing else. :)
Yes I used the matrix metering may have to change my settings during this type of photography, a pity as the D700 did very well, now I am on a level like an old Canon ;) (I have seen this behavior before when I got help from a Canon user some years ago)
-
Yes I used the matrix metering may have to change my settings during this type of photography, a pity as the D700 did very well, now I am on a level like an old Canon ;) (I have seen this behavior before when I got help from a Canon user some years ago)
We're much luckier now than when I had Olympus OM, since we can look at the histogram and review images in challenging light conditions. 8)
-
We're much luckier now than when I had Olympus OM, since we can look at the histogram and review images in challenging light conditions. 8)
You are right, but during sport, you may not get another chance, so the correct exposure first time is important.
I may have to alter my way of working to take the change into account, spot or center weighted.
-
Yes I used the matrix metering may have to change my settings during this type of photography, a pity as the D700 did very well, now I am on a level like an old Canon ;) (I have seen this behavior before when I got help from a Canon user some years ago)
Apparently Canon doesn't move the metering point along with the focus point at least in the spot metering mode even on the latest 5D MkVI. Dpreview complains about that:
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-5d-mark-iv/15
-
Apparently Canon doesn't move the metering point along with the focus point at least in the spot metering mode even on the latest 5D MkVI. Dpreview complains about that:
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-5d-mark-iv/15
Wasnt aware of that, thats truly a significant miss.
That feature makes spotmetering action capable
-
Dear All, Thank you all for your commiserations :-) Indeed, one lives and learns!
For the record, diagnosis by Nikon of my dropped D500 did not return a death certificate.... "the TFT monitor, front cover, focus screen, mount, prism box unit and eye piece block unit needs to be replaced....." It could have been far worse, given the factors of the impact. And i'm still waiting for the parts to ship in from Japan, estimate ~US$600 !
Hi Chambesi
. I feel your bad luck, not your stupid mistake.
And on the subject of tripod-lens/camera anti-slide safety, yes, the expensive lesson is been BIG positive in the "Red Button" on the MP-20 of the Surui system. But with a heavy lens that cost so much, I now always use the snap-link with 'Safety-Noose' attached to the tripod collar\neck [photos above 11 Jan 2017]. Still the tripod can fall or be knocked over (!)
kind regards
woody
........
Why the mounting base plate cant have the middle third as a clamp and the front and rear thirds of the clamp, be a
Permanent part of the base plate, where you would need to slide the lens foot into it, with a spring loaded pin to restrict the sliding operation of the foot. Keeping it secure if you over look any of the set up method.
This is a system that would safeguard many a equipment from serious damage, when a simple user error occurs.
I had a in depth conversation over the Xmas period, on this subject, as I am selecting a lens mounting system, and
Equipment security as well as performance are on my mind.
-
The type of lens foot clamping device I am referring to is a Manfrotto 357, the same as the one used on the 393 Gimbal. I believe there is a method of making it arca swiss compatible. It may raise the rig by no more than 10mm.
There is another foot clamp used on the Nest NT-530H US/Mk II. I do not know the part number.
The above are not endorsements of these products, but are to allow any one with a interest to view their lens foot mounting and clamping method.
With a little study, it will be seen that a lens foot is to be "front or rear entered" into the mounting plate. When the foot is in the mounting plate it is secured
by the dovetail sides, there is a retracting pin that limits the sliding operation of the lens foot, keeping the lens foot retained in the mounting plate.
When the correct balance is achieved, the section of dovetail side wall with the knob can be tightened to hold the foot in the selected position.
FWIW, I feel this is a upgrade to a standard arca swiss type clamping system, if rig security is a priority.
-
I just bought at Foyles here in London this very useful guide to the D500 published last year. A meaty volume that solves a few mysteries in the inner workings and Menu settings etc:
DAVID BUSCHS NIKON D500 GUIDE TO DIGITAL SLR PHOTOGRAPHY
https://www.rockynook.com/shop/photography/david-buschs-nikon-d500-guide-to-digital-photography/
-
Apparently Canon doesn't move the metering point along with the focus point at least in the spot metering mode even on the latest 5D MkVI. Dpreview complains about that:
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-5d-mark-iv/15
The metering does use the AF point in the 1D series.
-
I tried the d500 today at bh store in NY. They let me put a card and take the images home. I was considering it as a complement for my d750 because of the speed and extra reach but I´m spoiled my camera´s high ISO performance. In comparison, iso1600 in the d500 looks like iso3200 in the d750 or so is my impression. Anyone else has the same experience? Opinions I have found online so far are not in consensus.
-
I cannot compare the D750 performance, only the D3 and D600, last one has the same chip set as the D750.
The prefabrication of files, also of the RAW, is generally better in the fifth generation, so there might be an advantage at lower iso values like 1600 and 3200 but with high iso like 10.000 and 20.000 the fifth generation leads due to exspeed5.
Also the AF is much better, the WB in difficult light is much better, body ergonomics is better esp with the grip mb-d17.
Speed of 10fps, buffer size if needed, XQD as robust and very fast media. If you own the D750 I would consider the D500 as a second body, not as a replacement.
Why? The files of the D500 feature a clean and clear look, some might call it "a digital look", while the 24 MP full frame chip in 600, 610, 750 has a very subtle magic I cannot really describe. I also see it in the reaction of people towards the pictures. More positive emotional towards the D600 results.
If you would own the D3 I would clearly say: replace with D500. It runs circles around my old work horse.
-
I had to get used to the iq of the d500 very much to the point i almost sold, since i have my lenses for the d500 sorted out, happy camp.
Importantly the raw files almost need no processing.
My comparisons are D3, D800, Df all very different in iq.
-
Fons is right. With good light, most light is good with the exceptional white balance, the RAWs you open in your favourite converter, mine is NX-D, are next to perfect. For event jobs this is a great advantage.
PS to Fons: can you describe the difference between the IQs???
-
Paco, if you shoot dances using AF, the wider AF area, faster AF and low-ligh AF capability (down to -4EV) of D500 will surely be beneficial and advantageous over D750. While the pliability of D750 RAW file is unbeatable, there were moments I wanted the wider AF area when I shot the live performance sometime ago.
-
Fons is right. With good light, most light is good with the exceptional white balance, the RAWs you open in your favourite converter, mine is NX-D, are next to perfect. For event jobs this is a great advantage.
PS to Fons: can you describe the difference between the IQs???
Good question, Frank.
Ask yourself which camera to choose for what job.
-
You all made very good points. It boils down to specific needs, I guess. Extra reach, low light AF, buffer and general speed is what attracts me. Akira put the nail with the "pliability of D750 RAW" as the bigger selling point of that camera for me. Iq is excellent too and file size/quality just perfect for me (in this regard they are both similar)
I have the opportunity of getting a refurbished d500 for about 1450 euros and that get me wondering. Jury still out. It will be a complement, not replacement, of the d750
-
You all made very good points. It boils down to specific needs, I guess. Extra reach, low light AF, buffer and general speed is what attracts me. Akira put the nail with the "pliability of D750 RAW" as the bigger selling point of that camera for me. Iq is excellent too and file size/quality just perfect for me (in this regard they are both similar)
I have the opportunity of getting a refurbished d500 for about 1450 euros and that get me wondering. Jury still out. It will be a complement, not replacement, of the d750
so if you don't like it you can sell it and at that price I doubt you'll loose on the transaction
-
Good question, Frank.
Ask yourself which camera to choose for what job.
D3 for no job, D500 whenever speed and accuracy count, D600 for fine tonality e.g. leafs and skin and flowers.
I hope the D850 will inherit all good from the D600 and add all goodies of the D500.
Then I will not need the D3 and the D600 anymore.
I asked you because you actually use the D3 still, you own the DF and the D800 both of which I do not know
-
The D3 occasionally for the odd shot also because i like the heft of a big camera
Df to use with old lenses and i like the tonality
D800 mostly for closeups
D500 has become a workhorse with the 17-55mm f/2.8 attached
-
Thank You
-
I bought it and shot a dance show with it and it is very very nice action camera. Excellent companion for my d750!
-
Been going through the entirety of this forum to get caught up on the D500, today. So please indulge me, this "zombie response" to an old thread and for going so off topic.
I'm not going to buy a D5 just to get the memo functionality .... But it is a bad move to delete this feature from all second-tier models. D2-, D3-, D4-, D5-series all have this capability.
As does the antediluvian D100 natively when affixed to the Nikon OEM (can't attest to any third-party issue) MB-D100 battery grip. My understanding is the much improved [sic] D70/D70s models never had an OEM grip and I know of no third-party product available to them that also allowed for WAV file recording; were that even possible without firmware support or a dicey software "hack". Indeed the omission of that feature alone (conversely the lack of a real, glass penta prism and the inclusion of "scene modes" being the more commonly stated reasons) factored greatly for some when choosing a D100 over the highly esteemed, newer cameras. I found the D100 "voice memo" feature especially efficacious for "PJ" work and when resolving postmortem he said, they said challenges and similar surreptitiously produced "evidence". :D I always made a point of addressing the nice police officers by name and badge number when it was demanded I turn off the camera -- "or else"!
-
I cannot compare the D750 performance, only the D3 and D600, last one has the same chip set as the D750.
...The files of the D500 feature a clean and clear look, some might call it "a digital look", while the 24 MP full frame chip in 600, 610, 750 has a very subtle magic I cannot really describe. I also see it in the reaction of people towards the pictures. More positive emotional towards the D600 results. ...
Refreshing affirmation! I thought, it was just me getting that impression. Especially regarding that unquantifiable, "magic" quotient.
-
Refreshing affirmation! I thought, it was just me getting that impression. Especially regarding that unquantifiable, "magic" quotient.
I can also confirm that the said magic has found its way into the D850 files, especially at low ISO values
-
I can also confirm that the said magic has found its way into the D850 files, especially at low ISO values
All the better then, in capable hands!
-
All the better then, in capable hands!
I wish my eyes were as capable as my hands
-
Amen, brother!
-
PS: Reflecting of one week with the D850 I can say:
While it might be the best one can buy currently, it is just another step on the quality ladder and we will see much better cameras in 10 years from now.
When I first got my D3 I thought: "It cannot get much better." I was wrong.
When the D3X came out I thought: "24 Megapixels it far too much to attain critical sharpness against the dangers of micro camera shake." I was halfways wrong, because better hand holding technique, better stabilisation, the use of sturdy tripods, better glass, electronic first curtain tech and silent shooting using life view on static subjects solved these problems.
Now we stand at 45.5 Megapixels and it is possible to attain critical sharpness!